tv Tonight From Washington CSPAN October 16, 2012 8:00pm-11:00pm EDT
for a long time there were independent polls. there were a lot of internal democratic pools, which tended to show pretty much a dead heat for heitkamp up a few points, just with a slight edge over berg. but recently a mason-dixon poll came out that showed a completely tied race and we really haven't seen either of these candidates gain an advantage. this could be one of the races that on election day no one knows what is going to happen until late at night. ..
>> good evening and welcome to the pbs election special for the next 30 minutes i will be moderating the debate he trained the democratic and republican candidate running in congressional district number four. the candidates will be making opening and closing statements. they will respond to questions that i will ask of each
candidate. and now i would like to introduce the candidates participating in the debate. they are democratic state senate majority leader, steven horsford and republican, danny tarkanian. let's begin. mr. tarkanian declined us determine you are up first with your opening statement. tarkanian: thank you for hosting this debating giving the people an opportunity to hear from their candidates. i feel very strongly that these are important for him so that the public can see the differences and the concepts between each of the candidates. in fact i feel this is so important that i've offered to debate my opponent in each of the different counties of which is district represents. as many of you now now know this is a large alt-a diverse district with a lot of different interests and i thought it was important to get out in front of each of those communities and talk about important the important issues that are there. we are going to talk about those
issues today. over the past nine months i've traveled throughout this district are going to talk to the people from these communities. we discussed the issues that affect them and the solutions we hope to solve. i reported talking about the solutions to you today and i appreciate your watching. >> thank you. horsford: to all the viewers and pbs and the constituents in congressional district for. there really are clear choices in this election, and i'm glad to be here to talk about the differences between me and my opponent. but let's be clear. this election is not about me and it's really not even about my opponent. it's about all of you at home. those of you who are worried about keeping the job that you have, i will fight every day until everyone who wants a job has a job. those of you who aren't worried about the declining home values
in our community and will work hard everyday to restore those values and for those of you who are concerned about the threat to your medicare and social security, i will not rake our promise to our parents and their grandparents. i am asking for your support. i'm here today to talk to you about my position and i need your vote. thank you. >> the first question goes to mr. tarkanian. according to the las vegas sun you supported the arizona crackdown on illegal immigrants in 2010 which included the profiling of hispanics by police. it was reported in the sun is saying that you would deport illegal immigrants quote whenever we catch them. how do you explain his position to the 27% of the people in cd4 who are hispanic? tarkanian: what i stated was this. i believe the state of arizona has the duty and the obligation to do what they felt was best to protect the safety and welfare of their citizens.
arizona, my understanding passed this law because there were so much crime being committed by people coming to the country illegally and they were worried about their citizens. the states have an obligation to do those things. i also stated to the journal and the news outlets at the time that the treaty states does nevada need to do that and i don't see the same issue but we should leave it to nevada to make that determination. we are a country and of a rule of law and we have to support those laws. if we really want to solve the immigration problem and to make it easier and simpler for people who want to come to the country legally and not have to break the law. >> thank you. senator horsford. horsford: my opponent said he actually loved arizona anti-immigration law and if he had his way he would have allowed it to come to nevada.
this is a law that was supposed by the chamber of commerce, by the nevada development authority and the resort association, the chamber of commerce and others. i join with those groups because they were concerned that legislation, that anti-immigration arizona law would have cost hundreds of -- cost hundreds of job losses in our community. i believe many comprehensive immigration reform. we need tough order security and we need a comprehensive immigration policy because we are a nation of immigrants and a nation of law. issa for the d.r.e.a.m. act and i will work hard to make sure the young people who are brought here by no fault of their own are able to go onto college or serve in our military. >> mr. tarkanian you have 30 seconds to rebut. tarkanian: my opponent will continually misrepresent my positions with no basis to fall back on. what i said very clearly was
arizona has the right to provide for the health and safety of their citizens in nevada has the right to determine whether they need to do that or not. to leave the common sense approach the vast majority of americans believe in and even the people who have come in to our country illegally with a degree. >> the senator horsford you were an early supporter of barack obama and he has supported your candidacy for congress. four years after the president was first elected unemployment is still high in the state. nevada has the fourth -- of the nation. what responsibility does president obama half have the economic mess in this state? horsford: this is an important question because there are so many families struggling today with the national downturn in the economy but when my opponent talks about this issue he says he would not have even done anything if he were elected to reform the wall street situation or the financial services industry.
specifically, i think that more has to be done so that everyone who wants a job has a job. instead of talking about it, let's see the wreck and who has actually done it. i run an organization that helps train thousands of people for careers in the hospitality industry. is a partnership between 26 of the largest employers the culinary and the community. we were to make sure that people who want the training and education receive that and those who want to upgrade their skills. i will continue to work so the 150,000 nevadans who are still facing unemployment get the opportunity to have a secure job. it's what i had done and what i will continue to do. >> senator horsford what possibility does president obama have to be in the economy of the state right now? horsford: we all share in the responsibility to do everything we can to create jobs for those who need them. we have 150,000 nevadans who are unemployed.
about half of them, nearly half of them are from the construction sector architecture and engineering sectors. there are solutions we can deploy but the reality is my opponent joined with republicans in congress who have not worked to offer any solutions. in fact they have focused more on a woman's right and health care than they have to make sure we are creating jobs for the people in nevada. >> mr. tarkanian? tarkanian: as i told you before here he goes again. you will see that a lot from him today. quite frankly my opponent said one thing that was accurate. we need to look at the record and look at what my opponent's record is as the majority leader. as the majority leader he voted to increase taxes every single time a bill came up including the past legislative session where he increase taxes on small businesses doubled the tax and increase the pay -- fee for payroll and double the tax for car registration fees and was
doing those things the end result was the unemployment rate under my opponent's leadership in the state senate doubled over the past two years. he does have a record, stellar record and as a result he has diverted attention away from his record and continues to misrepresent what i stand for. >> senator horsford your rebuttal. horsford: i am proud of my record and my private sector as well as my role and as a state senator working together across party lines to get things done that need to get done. i worked with senator joe hardy to co-sponsor legislation that helped create thousands of jobs in the construction sector. we eliminated the payroll tax with payroll under $250,000 for my opponent is misleading. he is not accurate and i have a strong record. he does not. spin and the next question goes to mr. tarkanian. this has to do with social security. in an interview with the nevada
news and review you said social security quote should be privatized in the individual private accounts. if you support allowing individuals to divert a portion of their social security payroll taxes into a personal retirement account how do you protect current social security recipients? tarkanian: first of all when you provide full full social security benefits for people who were at the full retirement age. there has to be a buffer zone for when we would allow people to either opt out and use of private investment of their social security money are going to the system currently available right now and we would do that by decreasing and eliminating some wasteful government spending that is already out there. i believe strongly we have made a promise to our people when they paid into the social security fund they are entitled to have fun but i also believe in individual liberties of freedom that it made have made our country the greatest country and those individual liberties mean we should be able to be able to decide how we spend our
hard-earned money and reap the rewards when we are done. my opponent and i have a difference of opinion. my opponent thinks government has a better role to determine how we should invest their money. i believe in us as individuals. horsford: my opponent wants to privatize social security. i will work to protect and preserve it period. let's talk about with social security really is. this is replacement income for individuals who paid into it over a lifetime and who are entitled to it when they need it. my opponent wanted -- he said that he would allow wall street to determine whether or not people have social security in place. had we allow that to happen under the bush of administration, we have seen what it is has done to the housing market. just imagine what that would have caused to so many people dependent upon social security. he also wants to turn to karen to a voucher program. he says the rain budget was a
good place to start. if that is a good place to start it is where medicare will and. i will protect and preserve it. he wants to turn it into a voucher. tarkanian: if there was a new job created for every certification my opponent has made about my policy position the unemployment rate would have doubled under his leadership. i never said those things and quite frankly i believe us as individuals know what is best and we should give us the opportunity to do so. we don't need government telling us that. >> thank you. senator horsford for the next question. during the state legislature you were wanting to eliminate tax reductions for the mining industry. you advocated the elimination of industries tax protections enshrined in the state constitution. what is going to be your position on mining as a congressman if mining is huge in
lion, night and white pine counties, counties that are now marked under your congressional district? horsford: before answer that question let me clearly state my opponent's position. last week in our debate he said that the ryan budget was a good place to start. the ryan budget supports turning medicare into a voucher program and that is what my opponent stands for. that is what he says he will work to represent. i will work to protect it. on the issue of mining, this is a clear example actually of how i have worked to make sure that our tax policy is fair and it is equitable and it is transparent. we made sure that there were deductions that were being taken on the net receipts of minerals for out-of-state expenses. those deductions were no longer allowable so we could bring schools to our communities. i continue to enjoy the support of the mining industry however because i understand how important they are as a key industry in our state and the
jobs they provide to so many small communities throughout the congressional district. >> mr. tarkanian? tarkanian: my opponent is clear in what he thinks on taxes. is voted to increase taxes on every single vote that had come before him for the past eight years and that wasn't enough. he wanted to raise taxes another $1.2 billion this past legislative session and try to bully his way through. fortunately the governor wouldn't stand for it and would be to that proposal. with respect to the medicare because my opponent would like to deter -- as a person he wants to gut medicare is my opponent and he does it by supporting obamacare. obamacare has gutted money right out of medicare right off the bat. what kind of health care senior should have. i promised in a written statement in here today that i will not take away any benefits of current medicare. i know how important is and it's
important in my father and i will not cut it, different or my opponent. >> senator horsford you have the last word on this. horsford: again my opponent is not being clear or honest on his position on medicare is support 's support for the ryan budget and when he talks about the revenue increases to save our schools those were agreements reached in a bipartisan way that actually were signed by governor brian sandoval, a republican. so i understand what it's like to actually govern because i've been elected. my opponent has run now four times in each time the voters have rejected his ideas and his extreme positions. >> thank you. the next question goes to mr. tarkanian and some the subject of -- as you know in your congressional district a lot of people and nye county which is in congressional district number four support yucca mountain for a repository for nuclear waste. you wanted double nuclear energy to 40%. does that mean you support some of your constituents in their
desire to open up yucca mountain in order to store the waste that will be generated if we up our dependence on nuclear energy to 40%? tarkanian: what i've stated over and over again as we cannot continue to fund the important social services we have an in a state with the taxes we have with the current industry. we need to diversify our economy and we have have to look outside the box and we had to do something that helps our economy. we have spent $12 billion to the study for the infrastructure on yucca mountain. i believe that we should do something to help diversify the economy there in you lies that is another industry. i suggested turning to a were apposite facility and that would bring in $30 million in revenue. with if the people want that they are turning the largest storage facility in the country. elisa would create more jobs and tax revenues for the people of nevada. that doesn't work we will turn
to the military training facility. this will create more jobs because that's most important issue in the campaign. >> senator horsford your response? horsford: my opponent talks about using nuclear waste for an economic -- something that our governors regardless of party and their entire delegation as opposed to. this is dangerous and it's bad for business and bad for our community. that what we can to diversify the economy is support the economic diversification plans i worked on with governor sandoval on which identifies seven key industries that we could grow nevada's economy for the 21st century in manufacturing and health care and renewable energy for example but in order to do these things we have to make the right choices like making sure there is world class education for every child and we are making our colleges and our state universities available for people who want to be trained in
a chick hated. my opponent does not have a clear plan on economic diversification. i have worked with the governor and others to create one for the state of nevada. >> mr. tarkanian? tarkanian: is my ab punted is trying to talk the talk him he cannot walk the walk. he's been a state legislator for eight years and we have had this drop on the entire term and he is still to come up with any solutions to make it work. the planned has not is not healthy and employment rate which is still over 12%. what happened in the previous six years that he was a state legislator? why can't he do something as he has such great ideas. at the guts and courage to talk about alternative revenues we create for this day. my opponent doesn't. >> senator horsford the affordable care act, do you support the affordable care act commonly known as obamacare including the individual mandate and management of medicaid by the state specifically nevada?
horsford: i support the affordable care act but let's talk about the three reasons why this is good for nevada. first of all of you have a preexisting condition if you have diabetes, the of cancer, if you have hypertension and insurance company can never deny you access to health care again. if you are woman they cannot discriminate against you and your health care and have access to screenings including for mammograms. and if you are young person, you can stay on your parents insurance until you are 26. i had an accident when i was in college working my way through school. my car was totaled and i ended up with thousands of dollars in medical bills that took me many years in order to pay off. but it was because of that accident that i ended up having those challenges and i don't think any nevada kid who is trying to work their way through college should end up medically bankrupt because of an accident or a homeless. i will work to preserve the affordable care act and make sure it works for nevadans and my opponent wants to repeal it and has no idea what he would
replace it with. >> mr. tarkanian? tarkanian: there he goes again stating my position. we would like to repeal obamacare and we have come up with solutions that we can do to help solve the health care problem out there now but let's talk about what's wrong with obamacare. there are four major things icy breath of that. first of all we have a job crisis here in nevada. obamacare imposes a 2000-dollar per person employee tax on every employer that hires these people. all that will do is make -- cutting them to part-time wages. second of all people can afford to pay for their homes and food on the table for their children for this but this individual mandate of imposes a tax on individuals, for billion dollars to average income people. the third thing is that a care take $760 billion out of
medicare and 15 elected bureaucrats will make the determination. horsford: they are not average low income people. these are my constituents. they are my co-workers and they are my friends. they're my grandmother who lived in a nursing home for 27 years after being paralyzed from suffering from a stroke. these are real issues that require real solutions and working together to get this done. i opponent has no idea. he has no positions except extreme once. he wants to align himself with a tea party can offer more rigid ideology at a time when we need solutions. >> thank you very much. we have to go to the last question. mr. tarkanian you will answer first. it's been a year since the repeal of "don't ask don't tell" policy in the united states military and many would like to repeal the defense of marriage act. give me your opinion of "don't ask don't tell" and the defense of marriage act.
tarkanian: first of all i have at the crack to misrepresentation my opponent made. the medium income people in our state, they are unemployed and they don't have a job at all. if you care so much about those people he wouldn't have doubled the car registration tax which is put an additional burden on them. with respect to the "don't ask don't tell" policy of believe it should be left up to the military to determine how best to run the military and i would support that completely. with respect to the defense of marriage act i believe there should be a state issue to determine the law they want to have for those dates. >> senator horsford? horsford: i support marriage equality for all people and i also agree with the repeal of "don't ask don't tell." my opponent just talked about it again. these people meddling come on, how about we represent every nevada and, every person in the congressional district for? businesses and individuals alike.
i have the experience of getting things done that need to get done. my opponent does not. he has a 70 million-dollar judgment hanging over his head and i asked the voters, can we really trust someone to represent us who can handle his own personal affairs? >> and mr. tarkanian? tarkanian: talking about handling his own personal affairs. my opponent has failed to pay bills and went to collections. one time he had an arrest warrant because he didn't pay for traffic ticket but at the same time he gave a 500-dollar donation to denario herrera. that is taking care of your personal bills isn't it mr. horsford? >> we have come to the end of the debate and closing statements by the candidates and senator horsford you are up first. horsford: thank you to the sponsors and to pbs into all of you. this election is about your future. it's about who is going to fight for you and who gets it.
i get it. i get that if you are worried about a job you want to elect someone who is going to fight everyday to help you get one. i get it that you are worried about their declining home values and if you have been able to stay in your home at all. i get it that you are worried about these extreme positions that made break our promises for medicare and social security and i will work to preserve and protect it. i am asking for your support tonight because i want to represent you. those in the middle class who need a voice in a process that is broken in washington. there is too much gridlock there already and we can't send someone who would represent more of the same rigid tea party ideology. my opponent said he would conference with a tea party. how is that putting you first? my opponent misrepresents my positions in the closing statement and it's really unfortunate.
first of all i want to thank all of the viewers are watching this thing us and giving us the opportunity to talk. it's great to have the opportunity. our country is at a pivotal time in history and we can go down wanted to pass. mr. horsford has shown what path he wants the country to go down. higher taxes more regulation and more foreclosures and that is his record is as a state legislator. i have common sense solutions not extreme positions like my opponent. ask you when you go to the polls in november please consider supporting me and cast your vote so i can represent you in washington d.c.. thank you very much. >> we have come to the conclusion of the program. i would like to thank democratic state majority leader steven horsford and republican, danny tarkanian for participating and thank you for watching. good night. ♪
>> a welcome to prairie public's continuing coverage of election 2012. this is the debate for north dakota's u.s. senate seat being vacated by senator kent conrad. my guests today are the republican nominee and north dakota congressman rick berg and the democratic nominee, former attorney general heidi heitkamp. welcome to both of you and thank you so much for being here. both candidates will have one minute for opening and closing
statements and in between there will be topics asked by me in which case there will be discussion and debate. representative. berg: -- rick berg. bric i would like to thank everyone watching. this election may be the most important election in our lifetime. you know if we don't get our country back on track, to path of growth and prosperity of our children and grandchildren will not inherit the same country that we did. a senator i will fight against barack obama's failed policies and ford for the idea that north dakotans shouldn't be decisions about their family money and opportunities. i was raised in north dakota and i served in the best citizen legislature in the country where worked with senators and we craft a policy that has make north dakota the economic enemy of the nation. washington likes to make a complicated but it's simple. balancer budget by living within our means making the tough decisions, not tomorrow but
today m. are time and on our watch. that is the north dakota way and that is what i will fight for an washington. >> heidi heitkamp. heitkamp: 11 months ago i got into the race of the united states senate. i got in because like many of you i believe washington was a place that was badly broken. the politicians in washington seem to care more about their party than they did about the people. they cared more about their own selves and they did about moving the country forward. two years ago congressman berg sat at the table and promised us that he would end the gridlock in washington, that he would end the partisanship and move this country forward. that didn't happen. in fact unimportant pieces of legislation like the farmville congressman berg said i have cut $180 billion out of the farm program and cut crop insurance 20%. congressman berg was willing to change the whole medicare system that would cost retirees about
6400 extra dollars a year. he was willing to give tax breaks to companies who ship jobs overseas and i think that's the wrong decision. we need to move onto our first topic. a son of the hats are with out-of-state money and to start off i just want to have this opportunity when you're face-to-face to set the record straight if you want to on any of the ads that up and running and we will move onto other issues. heitkamp: when i was in the office of the attorney general, we had a case called buckley versus puleo. buckley versus puleo was a supreme court case that said money before -- it was the beginning of the end of civil campaigning in my opinion. it was the beginning of all of this outside money. to fight the outside money i asked for seven debates on various topics. i only got three and some of
them short like this one. i think what the american people and people in the state would hope would happen is they have an opportunity to see us at across the table as we talk about the issues in a format that allows for expansion. unfortunately a lot of the ads are not absent any of us paid for at this table but we are stuck with them and stuck with people's attitudes about them. let's get money out of politics and get back to having discussions like this with the american people and the people in our state. >> rick berg your response. berg: certainly from a third-party, i believe north dakotans, they believe in meeting people one-on-one and they believe on the issues and the issues can be more clear in his campaign. is the issue of government solutions or the individual solution so obviously i'm looking forward to this debate as we move forward in the campaign and i think the facts
will set themselves straight in the people of north dakota, this election will be decided by the people who know the truth and will come out on election day and i'm very optimistic that we will have a great november. >> we are ready to move onto specific issues. let's move onto the farm bill. there is than a lot of back and forth on why there is not a farm bill right now so my question in debate is why is there not a farm bill currently and what are the prospects after election of each if each of you are elected to pass the farm bill? berg: obviously agriculture is important and it's the backbone of north dakota. my family homesteaded in north dakota and my dad was a vegetarian and i grew up working on the farm. the challenge we have got right now, in fact not only did i draft bipartisan legislation that we push leadership in the house to bring the house bill to the floor. what we need is a farm bill based on crop insurance and both the senate bill in the house bill will do that.
i've worked hard on the conference committee. there are challenges with the senate bill certainly tying wetlands into crop insurance. it's unfortunate that agriculture is the one issue that has been bipartisan. were the last two years up until the last two weeks there's an editorial that attacks mammoth farm bill. i'm one of the hardest working people to move the farm bill for it. the challenge that there is there is a lot of people in congress who don't know if it comes from. they think it just shows up in the grocery store so that is a challenge we have. john boehner said he would bring the bill up before the end of the year and i will take his word for that and it will be just like the last farm bill. heitkamp: there is no better example at all in the failure of this congress on the farm bill. congressman berg stan tierney is a member of the house of representatives. the senate was able to pass albeit in an perfect farm bill into the senate, went to the house of representatives waiting
for that farm bill to pass the house and when we talk about gridlock the gridlock we got was within the republican party. it was a fight between cancer and boehner to move this forward. congressman berg is talked about his effort to move the farm bill forward. i like and that effort to waking up in the middle of the fourth quarter shooting the ball as often as you can but you are 50 points down. you didn't sign up for the ag committee and you said you supported the farm bill and there's no evidence he tried and when we talk about the discharge position how many votes from the discharge position? there were nine including yours and over 40 democratic votes. so you cannot look at any kind of activity that you had on the farm bill and claim any amount of success or any amount of legitimate effort. the number one job of someone in the united states senate, someone in the congress is to pass the farm bill and now we have got uncertainty because of the gridlock in the house of representatives and not in
congress. >> you response? berg: certainly it's simply not accurate. the last farm bill expired as well so your observations of me, i hope they don't apply to our former senators and congressman who are very strong advocates for the farm and the farm bill. you know, my cousin farmed our family homestead farm and he died suddenly last spring. his high school son is taking over that farm. he isn't able to farm if he doesn't have crop insurance in place and he needs the farm bill pass. this is personal to me and i'll do everything i can and will continue to do what i can to get the farm bill passed because it's important to north dakota. heitkamp: i have come from a farming community. i grew up on a farm in i grew up picking potatoes and picking cucumbers and i know how critical that safety net is but you that you cannot escape the fact that you don't even know
when you come back that you will solve the gridlock in the house of representatives. you promised congressman that you can get things done for north dakota because you could have a special relationship with the majority leader and the relationship with the speaker. speaker. none of that has come to fruition and i don't want to lay the blame on anyone's doorstep other than the house of representatives of which you are a member of the majority. >> senator byrd your response? berg: there are a lot of things we could get into but i certainly think a good example of the problem is you haven't had a budget in three years in the senate. we have a stonewall problem. house republicans leadership is -- on the farm bill. this is a challenge and i've worked with others in a bipartisan way. there is no question what needs to be done. i've had the word of the speaker is going to take it up at the
end of the year. that is what we have to do. our challenge in agriculture is quite frankly one of the problems in washington. as i said with a senate with the same problem no budget in three years, think the deficit is one of the biggest problems facing our country and not to even out low-budget? you know this is a problem. >> final response and we will move onto health care. heitkamp: i want to say the senate farm bill cut $23 billion. in fact it was in excess of what they would have been required to do under sequestration. it was there and it was real reform. to say bet on me that i can get the job done i think at this point, we have seen what happened and we had a chance in july and we had a chance in august and the chance again in september and based on the debit. i don't see that the gridlock in the house of representatives is going to get solved by an election. i think it's only going to add
to the gridlock and we are debating foreign policy because of the failure of the house on sequestration and about balancing the budget and that is not good for now but carter farmers and not good for crop insurance and not good for voting forward to provide a legitimate safety net for farmers in north dakota. >> the last word on farming and let's move onto the next issue. heidi heitkamp, come short of a co-sponsor aarp in north dakota. regarding medicare and social security are of most concern concern to you and are there any you would favor or support? heitkamp: it's obvious that thing that is most concern to me is a so-called premium supporter providing a voucher for medicare into the future. we know that what that will do is set an arbitrary line. everybody under the age of 55 who for years have paid into the system now will be handed a voucher. congressman will say but yes they can stay in traditional
medicare. we know traditional medicare only has -- who are the sickest and we have real problems and making sure that is solvent. creating super green -- premium support for medicare and the second biggest problem is how are we going to keep the medicare system solvent? congressman berg talks about 12 years of solvency and what he doesn't tell you is that those same people tell you it's only for if you repeal the affordable care act and that is a huge risk. we need time to get the medicare system working. my solutions include negotiating prescription drug prices which i think the president was wrong when he took it off the table. getting fraud, waste and abuse out which would be 70 or $80 billion going into the future in looking at what we can can do but to promote wellness. i have a long history of working to promote wellness and north dakota special specially the tobacco area. i didn't get much help from congressman berg in the legislature in that regard to
help keep people more -- healthier this country. >> we need to get a response from rick berg. berg: i would like to start out first of all that you are incorrect in their numbers. medicare will not -- it goes bankrupt in 12 years and there was a shuffling of numbers and you have to check your facts, and a that double counting of numbers and it's four years, not four years and 12 years. i just want to backup, 12 years it goes bankrupt. that is bad for seniors and bad for people in medicare. that was a promise to people so let's get the facts straight. 12 years ago is bankrupt. there are two proposals. obamacare which takes $760 billion out of medicare sets up a board which will make decisions for seniors. they will ration care for seniors. that is the challenge come of as the fundamental core or the
other alternative is there is no change for anyone at or near retirement. you can keep medicare. that is the plan. there'll be two options in the differences choice. there are two options at no cost. if you want to add some you have a choice to add a better policy or one that is -- more to what you like but these are clearly two different solutions. heitkamp: congressman berg don't trust any partisan source. go out and take a look at the kiser family foundation web site. it states clearly that if you repeal the health care law that solvency is four year so i'm not buying your facts on that. the other point that i want to point out is you talk about the $719 billion. it is the biggest whiff in the
whole campaign and everybody who looks at it says it is a big fed. honestly, there's only one person at this table whoever ordered that cut and that is congressman berg when he voted for the ryan plan. so let's cut the nonsense. health care and medicare are way too important to play politics with the numbers, to play politics with the policy. we need to fix a system and there are long-term ways we can do that like negotiating for prescription drug prices and long-term ways we can do that by cutting the fraud and abuse and start taking the facts of what is happening with medicare and we don't need to privatize the system the way you recommended. >> the final word on this rick berg and we will move onto the next issue. berg: it's not 219 billion. the cuts are to hospitals and physicians and north dakota. it cuts hospice. these are real cuts. $760 billion from medicare.
the cuts relating to north carolina, she said she went to north carolina and she had to go to 23 different providers before she could find someone to take medicare. that is the problem. when we cut 760 like president obama did to fund obamacare, from our seniors people quit taking medicare patients. the other thing we want to make clear is in the house budget it did take 716 but it put that money back into medicare to strengthen it. it didn't take it like obamacare. with a crisis on our hands and what we have to do and this is the problem. there's too much rhetoric. we need to know the numbers and know the facts and come up with solutions that will help our seniors and ensure we deliver on the promise. >> we will segue into the affordable care act or obamacare as it is known by both sides. what parts a lot do you favor and what parts do not favor and
hit electable would be the direction we take regarding the affordable care act? rick berg you can start this time. berg: i will vote to repeal obamacare. this is the one clear distinction in this race. my opponent will not vote to repeal it. this is a $1.7 trillion takeover of our health care industry. we are talking about medicare, $716 billion coming out of our seniors at the worst is that it decreases unelected officials going into this ipap board. they will make decisions on what is covered and what is not covered. what that fundamentally does is it puts government between their doctor and their patient. this is a big government solution that is wrong. my wife is in a family practice doctor and she said you know it puts government between me and my patient. my son and i were having breakfast several months ago and
this gal was busing tables and she stopped at our table and she said i don't know what will happen if obamacare stays. we started in the restaurant. is this kicks in i don't know what we are going to do. the olive garden and red lobster this week said we are going to go to part-time employees because we don't understand the impact. this bill creates a cloud of uncertainty and is hurting our whole economy and puts our economic recovery at the heart of small-business. heitkamp: let me tell you about somebody i met in a restaurant. she was on crutches then i looked down and asked her how she hurt her foot. i looked down at her foot obviously was not hurt. she had fun at some point crippled and i looked at her her and her face was smiling. she said no i had polio as a young girl. and then she said to me thank you, thank you for fighting for
me. preexisting conditions absolutely critical to keep that. it's critical we eliminate the lifetime cap an absolutely critical we continue to close the doughnut hole so seniors have their prescription drugs than they need them. it's absolutely critical that we keep kids on our health insurance. that is all part of the health care law but the most significant reason that exactly addresses the issues of congressman berg raised earlier which is payer providers what they are due. is called the frontier states amendment. it was a hard-fought provision in the affordable care act and it gives medicare payments back to our providers so we aren't all paying the cost of medicare. let's take a look at that. congressman berg was in the legislature voted against the frontier states amendment and continues to vote against the frontier states amendment so i would submit if he was really concerned about whether in fact we have providers who are
willing to provide medicare, that we need to repeal the frontier states amendment. >> senator byrd, equal time. berg: i want to set the record straight. there was a resolution that came in so what we did was we passed a resolution unanimously public republicans and democrats. i wanted to look at this because this is what i did and this is where i'm at in 2003. we have to get these facts straight. that is the frustration in this campaign. obamacare which the president supports for the past 30 bills trying to change obamacare. perry reed's senate majority leader and my opponent has fully endorsed is wrong for north dakota. he will not take up one of these changes that will make obamacare a workable -- but let's talk
about it. i've agree we need to deal with that, the lifetime cap and preexisting condition should be done downed the state level in the doughnut hole and covering children until they are 26. obama karis 20207 are pages long. this is a clear difference. my opponent says let's keep this 2700 page bill that has 21 -- the biggest tax on middle america and quite frankly it does not cost -- [inaudible] heitkamp: the only reason he says to amend the problem is because it is a good political slogan. its sales when you say people don't like obamacare so i'm going to talk about repealing it. it's like taking your car and to get it fixed and when they offer you a replacement car you say no i don't need that. i guess i will just walk. it needs to be fixed. there are good and bad in the health care law and that is to
be fixed and there is absolutely no reason to not amend the law as it currently exists. the only reason we hear this argument over and over again is because too many politicians are playing politics with our health care and that needs to add. it's too important. >> i want to get a quick response and then we need to move to closing statements. the oil industry. heitkamp: at a great north dakota plan. i put together planned that addresses the infrastructure which takes some of the money the federal government is now earning as a result and reinvested in infrastructure like a property tax payment. we need to get infrastructure out there and we need affordable housing and a water system that works. we need to have it plan that provides better roads out there. we need to better balance i think our agricultural industry
with our oil industry and i think we can all live together as long as we do the investment. i think congressman berg gave up great opportunities for news and legislatures to make those assessments and as a result we are behind the eight ball once again. >> 32nd response from the berg. berg: this is one of the critical differences in this campaign. energy is the hope for our country. like we did in north dakota, weird renewables and additional energy. here's the problem. the problem is the senate majority leader harry reid who you are going to put in power and have agreed to support him have said colin oil are making a greener country. this is what we are up against. wewe are up against regulations and taxation against their energy industry that will shut down our coal industry and with fracking it threatens that.
>> by i know it goes by fast. heidi heitkamp. heitkamp: the bottom line is i am willing to put partisanship aside willing to represent north dakota's interest. i don't care what harry reid thinks about oil and gas because i have pointed history that i think is a history of protecting the industry but the question that i get often as how do you make a difference? we believe you want to go there and change things and stop this partisanship. i tell a story about a guy i met when i was trying to get folks to get on board to stop domestic violence in this cop came up to me and put his finger in my face and he said listen here, men will always beat their wives and you cannot stop them. i said boy, hope not. i sure don't think that's true but you know what? i won't live in a world where we won't try. we have to try to stop the partisanship and move this country forward. that is why i am running for the united states in it. berg: thank you heidi and thanks ruined was watching.
i've talked to people about the challenges facing our country and one person summed it up. a school superintendent said i worry about their future. he said rick, you have got to get this fixed. that is why i'm in this race. my 12-year-old son, for children and grandchildren. i want to stop washington from destroying our economy with this we can't they back. and i'm willing to stopping obamacare for making medical decisions for us. i'm willing because we can get this fixed and we can restore the promise of the american dream to our children for future generations if we take the north dakota way to washington. i'm asking for your vote and your support to change america. we can do this. thank you and god bless. >> thank you both of you for coming on for this debate. november 6 is election day and thank you for watching the team coverage of election 2012.
that is better than having someone tell me what to think. c-span, c-span2 and c-span3 and booktv which i love, c-span3 is the history channel and they have been doing civil war series. sometimes i want to visit the senate and see what the house is doing so i watch c-span for those kinds of things too.
>> we are going live to the 2012 presidential debate a train president barack obama and mitt romney held at hofstra university on new york's long island. from undecided voters in the audience submitted questions about foreign and domestic issues. cnn's candy crowley has selected which ones who asked the candidates. it looks like she is wrapping up instructions for the audience and then she will introduce president obama and mitt romney. >> they are awaiting your questions. thank you all. enjoy tonight and i will see you on the other and. thanks. [applause]
i'm candy crowley. we are hear for the second debate, a town hall. the gallop organization chose 82 uncommitted voters from the new york area. their questions drive the night. my goal is to give the conversation direction and to ensure questions are answered. the questions are known to me and the team only. neither the commission nor the candidates have seen them. i hope to get to as many questions as possible, and because i'm the optimistic sort, i'm sure the candidates will ablige keeping answers on point. each candidate has two minutes to respond to a common question, and there will be a two minute follow-up. the audience in the hall agreed to be polite and attentive, no cheering or booing of any sort. we'll set aside that agreement just once to welcome president barack obama and governor mitt romney. [cheers and applause]
[applause] >> moderator: gentlemen, thank you, both, for joining us here tonight. we have a lot of folks waiting all day to talking talk to you. i want to get to it. governor romney, you won the coin toss, so the first question goes to you. i want to turn to a first time voter, jeremy whose a question for you. >> as a 20-year-old college student, all i hear is that when i graduate, i have little chance to get employment. what can you say to reassure me, but more importantly, my parents that i will be able to sufficiently support myself after i graduate school.
romney: thank you, jeremy. thank you for being here, thank you to the hofstra university for organizing the event, and thank you, mr. president, for being a part of the debate. your question is one that's asked by college kids all over the country. i was in pennsylvania with someone who just graduated in philadelphia, and she said, i got my degree. i can't find a job. i got three part-time jobs. they are just barely enough to pay for the food and an apartment. i can't begin to pay back student loans. we have to do two things. make sure it's easier for kids to afford college, and make sure when they are out of college, there's a job. when i was governor of massachusetts to get a high school degree, you had to pass an exam. if you graduated in the top quarter of your class, we gave you a job scholarship. four years tuition free to the college of your choice in massachusetts, a public institution. i want to ensure we keep the pell grant program growing as well as the loan program so
people are able to afford school, but the key thing is to ensure you get a job when you get out of school. what's happened over the last four years has been very, very hard for america's young people. i want you to be able to get a job. i know what it takes to get this economy going. with half of college kids graduating this year, without a college -- without a job, and without a college level job, that's unacceptable. likewise, you have more and more debt on the back. less debt, more jobs. i know what it takes to create good jobs again. i know what it takes to make sure that you have the kind of opportunity you deserve, and kids across this country recognize we're bringing back an economy. it's not going to be like the last four years. the middle class has been crushed over the last four years, and jobs have been too scarce. i know what it takes to bring them back, i'll do that, and when do you graduate? 2014, when you come out in 2014, i presume i'll be president, i'll ensure you get a job.
thanks, jeremy, yeah, you bet. >> moderator: mr. president. obama: jeremy, your future is bright. the fact you make investments in higher education is critical, not just to you, but the entire nation. now, the most important thing we can do is to make sure that we are creating jobs in this country, but not just jobs, good paying jobs. ones that can support a family. what i want to do is build on the five million jobs created over the last 30 months in the private sector alone, and there's a bunch of things we can do to ensure your future is bright. number one, i want to build manufacturing jobs in the country again. you know, when governor romney said we should let detroit go bankrupt, i said we're going to bet on american workers and american auto industry, and it's come surging back. i want to do that in industries, not just in detroit, but all across the country, and that means we change our tax codes so we give incentives to companies investing here in the united states and creating jobs here,
but it also means we help them and small businesses to exported all around the world and new markets. number two, we got to make sure that we have the best education system in the world, and the fact you're going to college is great, but i want everybody to get a great education. we worked hard to make sure student loans are available for folks like you, but i also want to make sure that community colleges are offering slots for workers to be retrainedded for the jobs out there right now and the jobs of the future. number three, we got to control our own energy. you know, not only oil and natural gas, which we've been investing in, but also, we have to make sure we are building the energy source of the future, not just next year, but ten years from now, 20 years from now. that's why we invest in solar, winds, and biofuels. energy efficient cars. reduce the benefit in a balanced way. asking the wealthy to pay more with cuts so we can invest in
you. take money spent on the war in the last decade to rebuild roads, bridges, and schools. we do those things, not only your future is bright, but america's future is bright as well. >> moderator: let me ask for a more immediate answer beginning with mr. romney, quickly. what can you do? we're looking at a situation where 40% of the unemployed have been unemployed for six months or more. they don't have the two years that jeremy has. what about the long term unemployed that need a job now? romney: there's 23 million people struggling to find a job, and a lot, candy, have been out of work a long, long, long time. the president's policies have been exercised over the last four years, and they have not put americans back to work. we have fewer people working today than we have when the president took office. if the -- the unemployment rate was 7.8 management when he took office, and it's 7.8% now. if you calculate that rate,
taking back the people who dropped out of the work force, it's 10.7%. we have not made progress needed to put people back to work. that's why i have a five point plan that gets america 12 million new jobs in four years and rising take home pay to help germany get a job when he gets out of school, people across the country unemployed right now, and one thing that the president said, which i want to make sure that we understand. he said that i said we should take detroit bankrupt, and that's right. my plan was to have the company go through bankruptcy like 7-11 did at macy's and continental airlines and come out stronger. i know he keeps saying you wanted to take detroit bankrupt. the president took detroit bankrupt, general motors and chrysler bankrupt. when you say i wanted to take the auto industry bankrupt, you actually did. i think it's important to know that that was a process that was necessary to get those companies back on their feet so they could
start hiring more people. that was precisely what i recommended and ultimately what happened. >> moderator: let me give the president a chance. go ahead. obama: what governor romney said is not true. he wanted to take them into bankruptcy without providing a way to stay open. we would have lost a million jobs. don't take my word for it, take the executives at gm and chrysler, some of whom are republicans, may even support governor romney, but they'll tell you his prescription was not going to work. governor romney says he he has a five point plan. he does not. it's a one point plan. and that plan is to make sure folks at the top play by a different set of rules. that's been his philosophy in the private sector, philosophy as governor governor and a presl candidate. you can make a lot of money and pay lower tax rates than somebody who makes less. you can ship jobs overseas and get tax breaks for it.
you can invest in a company, brunt bankrupt it, strip away pensions, and you still make money. that's the philosophy we've seen in place for the last decade. that's what's. squeezing middle class families. we have fought back for four years to get out of that mess. the last thing we need to do is to go back to the very same policies that got us there. >> moderator: mr. president, next question is going to be for you here. governor romney, there's plenty of chances here to go on, but we have all of these folks. i'll let you -- romney: let detroit answer, and the rest of the answer is off the mark. >> moderator: you'll have plenty time coming up. i want to move on to something sort of connected to cars here, and we want to get a question from phillip zarcola. >> energy secretary has been on record three times stating it's
not policy of the department to help lower gas prices. do you agree with secretary chu this is not the job of the energy department? obama: the most important thing we can do is to make sure we control our own energy. here's what i've done since i've been president. we have increased oil production to the highest levels in 16 years. natural gas production is the highest it's been in decades. we have seen increases in coal production and coal employment, but what i've also said is we can't just produce traditional sources of energy, but we have to look to the future. that's why we doubled fuel efficiency standards on car. in the middle of next decade, any car you buy, you go twice as far on a gallon of gas. that's why we doubled wind and solar and biofuels. these things contributed to us
lower oil imports to the lowest levels in 16 years. now, i want to build on that. that means, yes, we still continue to open up new areas for drilling. we continue to make it a priority for us to go after natural gas. we've got potentially 6 # -- 600,000 jobs and years of energy beneath our feet with natural gas. we can do it in a environmentally sound way. we have to continue to figure out how we have efficient energy because that's how we reduce demand, and that's what's going to keep gas prices lower. now, governor romney will say he's got an all of the above plan, but basically his plan is to let the oil companies write the energy policies. he's got the oil and gas part, but he doesn't have the clean energy part, and if we are only thinking about tomorrow or the next day and not thinking about ten years from now, we're not
going to control our own economic future because china, germany, they are making these investments, and i'm not going to seed those b -- jobs of the future to those countries. i expect energy to be built here in the united states. that helps germany get a job and ensures you are not paying as much as gas. >> moderator: governor, on the subject of gas prices. romney: look at the president's policies, okay, opposed to the rhetoric. we had four years of policies playeded out, and the president's right in terms of the additional oil production, but none of it came on federal land. as a matter of fact, oil production is down 14% this year on federal land and gas production down 9%. why? because the president cut in half the number of licenses and permits for drilling on federal lands and in federal waters. where did the increase come from? well, a lot came from the range in north dakota. what was the participation there? the administration brought a
criminal action against the people drilling up there for oil. this massive new resource we have. what was the cost? a 20-25 birds killed and they brought out a migratory bird act to go after them on a criminal basis. look, i want to make sure we use our oil, our coal, our gas, our nuclear, our renewables. i believe in our renewable capabilities, ethanol, winds, solar, it's important part of the energy mix, but we don't need the president keeping us from taking advantage of oil, coal, and gas. this has not been mr. oil, mr. gas, or mr. coal. talk to the people working in the industries. i was in coal country. people grabbed my arms saying, please, save my job. head of the epa said you can't build a coal plant. it's virtually impossible given the regulations. when the president ran for office, he said if you build a coal plant, go ahead, but you'll go bankrupt. that's not the right course for america. let's take advantage of the
energy resources we have as well as the energy sources for the future, and if we do that, if we do what i'm planning on doing, which is getting us energy independent, north america energy independence within eight years, manufacturing jobs will come back because our energy is low cost. they are already beginning to come back because of abundant energy. i'll get america and north america energy independent by more drilling, more permits and licenses. we're going to bring that pipeline in from canada. how in the world the president said no to that pipeline, i'll never know. this is about bringing good jobs back for the middle class of america. that's what i'll do. >> moderator: mr. president, i want to move you to the gist of the question which is are we looking at the new normal? tomorrow morning, a lot of people wake up and fill up and find the price of gas is over $4 a gallon. is it within the purview of the government to bring prices down, or are we looking at the new
normal? obama: candy, no doubt world demand is up, but production is going up, and we use oil more efficiently, and very little of what governor romney said is true. we've opened # up public lands. we're drilling more on public lands than in the previous administration, and the previous president was an oil man, and natural gas suspect just appearing magically. we're encouraging it and working with the industry, and when i hear governor romney say he's a big coal guy, keep in mind, governor, you stood in front of a coal plant and painted at it and said this plant kills and took great pride in shutting it down. now suddenly, you're a champion of coal. what i've tried to do is be consistent. with respect to coal, we made the largest investment in clean coal technology to make sure that even as we're producing
more coal, we're producing is cleaner and smarter. same thing with oil, same with natural gas, and the proof is our oil imports are down to the lowest levels in 20 years. oil production is up, natural gas production is up, and most importantly, we're also starting to build cars that are more efficient. that's creating jobs. that means cars can be exported because that's the demand around the world, and it also means that it'll save money in your pocketbook. that's the strategy needed, and that's what we'll do in the next four years. romney: but that's not what you have done in the last four years. that's the problem. in the last four years, you cut permits and licenses on federal land and waters in half. obama: not true. romney: how much did you cut them then? obama: produced more oil -- romney: how much did you cut it -- obama: there's a bunch of oil -- romney: i had a question, how
much did you cut them by? obama: happy to answer the question. romney: all right, and it is? obama: you had a bunch of oil companies who had leases on public lands that they were not using. what we said was you can't just sit on this for ten, twenty, or thirty years, decide when you want to drill, when you want to produce when it's most profit able for you, public lands, so if you want to drill on public land, use it or lose it. what we did was take away those leases, and we are now reletting them so that we can make a profit. romney: production on government land is down. production is down 14%. production on gas is down 9%. obama: not true. romney: absolutely true. people recognize we have not produced more oil and gas on federal lands and federal waters, and coal, coal production is not up, coal jobs are not up. i was at a coal facility where 1200 people lost their jobs.
the right course for america is to have a true all of the above policy. i don't think anyone really believes that you're a person pushing for oil and gas and coal. you'll get your chance in a moment. i'm still speaking. the answer is i don't believe that's the case -- that was a statement. i don't think the american people believe that. i'll fight for ole, coal, and natural gas. the proof whether a strategy is working or not is the price you pay at the pump. if you pay less than you paid a year or two ago, why then the strategy's working, but you're paying more. when the president took office, the price of gasoline here in nassau county was a $1.86 a gallon, now it's four bucks. price of energy is up. if the president's policies work, the cost of energy comes down. i'll fight to create more energy in this country to get america energy secure, and part of that is bringing in a pipeline of oil from canada, taking advantage of
the oil and coal here, drilling offshore in alaska, drilling offshore in virginia where the people want it. that gets us the energy we need. >> moderator: mr. president, can you address, because we finally got the gas prices here, could you address what the governor said which is if your energy policy was working, the price of gasoline would not be $4 a gallon here. is that true? obama: the governor said when i took office, it was $1.86. why is that? the economy was on the verge of collapse. because we were about to go through the worst recession since the great depression. as a consequence of some of the same policies that governor romney's now promoting so it's conceivable that governor romney could bring down prices because with his policies, we could be back in that same mess. what i want to do is to create an economy that's strong and at the same time produce energy, and with respect to this
pipeline that governor romney talks about, we built enough pipeline to wrap around the entire earth once so i'm all for pipelines. i'm all for oil production. what i'm not for is us ignoring the other half of the equation. for example, on wind energy, when governor romney says these are message their jobs when you got thousands of people right now in iowa, right now in colorado who are working, creating wind power with good paying manufacturing jobs and the republican senator in iowa is all for it, providing tax breaks to help this work and governor romney says i'm opposed. i'd get rid of it. that's not an energy strategy for the future. we have to win the future. i plan to win it as president of the united states. romney: he got the first question, so i get the last answer. >> moderator: in the follow-up, it doesn't work like that, but i'll give you a
chance, i promise you i'm going to. the next question is for you. if you want to continue on, but i don't want to leave the guys sitting here. romney: i don't have a policy of stopping wind jobs in iowa. they are real jobs. i appreciate wind jobs in iowa and coos -- across our country and the jobs in coal and oil and gas. i'm going to make sure we take advantage of the energy resources to bring back manufacturing to america. we're going to get through a very aggressive energy policy, 3.5 million more jobs in the country that's critical. >> moderator: moving you along -- obama: i'm used to being interrupted. >> moderator: moving on to taxes here and all the folks waiting. governor, this question is for you. it comes from mary palona. >> governor romney, you stated if elected president, you plan to reduce the tax rates for all the tax brackets, and that you
would work with the congress to eliminate some deductions in order to make up for the loss in revenue. concerning the various deductions, the mortgage deduction, the charitable deduction, the child tax credit, and also the -- oh, what's the other credit -- i forgot -- [laughter] obama: you're doing great. >> oh, i remember, the education credits which are important to me because i have children in college, what would be your position on those things which are important for the middle class? romney: thank you very much. you are right about part of that which i want to bring rates down, simplify the tax code, and i want to get middle income taxpayers to have lower taxes, and the reason i want middle income taxpayers to have lower taxes is because middle income taxpayers have been buried over the past four years. you've seen as middle income people in the country, incomes
go down $4300 a family, even as gasoline prices are up $2,000. health insurance premiums up $2500. food prices up, utility prices up, the middle income families in america have. crushed over four years. i want to get relief to middle income families. that's part one. now, how about deductions? it's not going to bring rates down across the board for everybody, but i'm going to limit deductions and exemptions and credits particularly for people at the high end because i'm not going to have people at the high end pay less than they are paying now. the top 5% of taxpayers continue to pay 60% of the income tax the nation collects. that will stay the same. middle income people are going to get a tax break. in terms of bringing down deductions, one way is to say everybody gets -- i'll pick a number, dlsh -- $25,000 in credits. you can decide which to use,
mortgage, children credits, use that to fill in the bucket of deductions, but your rate comes down, and the burden also comes down on you for one more reason, and that is every middle income taxpayer no longer will pay any tax on interest, dividends, or capital gains. no tax on your savings. that makes life a lot easier. if you're getting interest from a bank, if you're getting a statement from a mutual fund or any other kind of investments you have. you don't have to worry about filing taxes on that because there's no taxes for anybody making $200,000 a year and less on your interest, dividends, and capital gains. why low ere taxes on the middle class? because under the last four years, they were buried. i want to help people in the middle class, and i will not under any circumstances reduce the share paid by the highest income taxpayers, and i will not, under any circumstances, increase taxes on the middle class.
the president's spending, the president's borrowing will cause this nation to have to raise taxes on the american people, not just at the high end. a recent study has shown that people in the middle class will see 4,000 a year higher taxes as a result of the spending and borrowing of this administration. i will not let that happen. i'll get us on track to a balanced budget, and i'm going to reduce the tax burden on middle income families, and what's that going to do? it's going to help those families and create incentives to start growing jobs again in the country. >> moderator: thanks, governor. obama: my philosophy on taxes has been simple, and that is i want to give middle class families and folks striving to get in the middle class relief. they have been hit hard over the last decade over the last 15 or 20 years. four years ago, i stood on a stage like this one at the town hall saying i'll cut taxes for middle class families. that's what i've done by $3600.
i said i'd cut taxes for small business, the drivers and engines of growth. we cut them 18 times. i want to continue those tax cuts for middle class families and for small businesses. what i've also said is if we're serious about reducing the deficit, if this is genuinely a moral obligation to the next generation, then in addition to tough spending cuts, we've also got to make sure that the wealthy do more. the first $250,000 worth of income? no change. that means 98% of american families, 97% of small businesses, they will not see a tax increase. i'm ready to sign that bill right now. the reason it's not happening is because governor romney's allies in congress have held the 98% hostage because they want tax breaks for the top 2%. what i've said is for above
$250,000, we can go back to the tax rates we had when bill clinton was president creating 23 million new jobs. that's part of what took us from deficits to surplus. it will be good for our economy, and it will be good for job creation. now, governor romney has a different philosophy. he was on "60 minutes" just two weeks ago, and he was asked, is it fair for somebody like you making $20 million a year to pay a lower tax rate than a nurse or bus driver, somebody making $50,000 a year. he said, yes, that's fair. he said i think that's what grows the economy. i di agree with that. what grows the economy is when you get the tax credit we put in place for your kids going to college. i think that grows the economy. i think what grows the economy is when we make sure small businesses are getting a tax credit for hiring veterans who fought for our country.
that grows our economy. we just have a different theory, and when governor romney stands here after a year of campaigning, when during a republican primary he stood on stage and said i'm going to give tax cuts, he didn't say tax rate cuts, but rate cuts to everybody, including the top 1%, you should believe him because that's been his history. that's exactly the kind of top-down economics that's not going to work if we want a strong middle class and an economy working for everybody. >> moderator: governor romney, i'm sure you have a reply there. [laughter] romney: that's right. you heard what i said about the tax plan. the top 5% continue to pay 60% as they do today. i'm not looking to cut taxes for wealthy people, but looking to cut taxes for middle income people. why do i want to bring rates down and at the same time lower exemptions and deductions for people at the high end? because if you bring rates down, it makes it easier for small business to keep more of their
capital and higher people, and for me, this is about jobs. i want to get america's economy going again. 54% of america's workers work in businesses that are taxed as individuals. when you bring rates down, those small businesses are able to keep more money and hire more people. for me, look at what happened in the last four years and say, this has been a disappointment. we can do better than this. we don't have to settle for 43 months with unemployment above 8%. 23 million americans struggling to find a good job now. there's 3.5 million more women living in poverty today than when the president took office. we don't have to live like this. we can get the economy going again. the 5-point plan does it. energy independence for north america in five years, opening up trade in latin america, cracking down on china when they cheat, getting us a balanced budget, fixing the training programs for workers, and
finally, champ yoning small business -- championing small business. i want to help small business grow and thrive. i know how to make it happen. i spent my life in the private sector. jobs are going now because of the policies of this administration. >> moderator: governor, let me ask the president about what you said. the governor says he is not going to allow the top 5%, i believe is what he said, to have a tax cut, that it evens out, but what he wants to do is give the tax cut to the middle class. settled? obama: no, it's not settled. look, the cost of lowering rates for everybody across the board 20% along with what he wanted to do in terms of eliminating the state tax, along what he wants to do in terms of corporate changes in the tax code costs about $5 trillion. governor romney also wants to spend $2 trillion on additional
military programs even though the military's not asking for it. that's $7 trillion. he also wants to continue the bush tax cuts for the wealthiest americans. that's another trillion dollars. that's $8 trillion. now, what he says is he's going to make sure this doesn't add to the deficit, and he's going to cut middle class taxes, but when he's asked how are you going to do it? which deductions? which loopholes will you close? he can't tell you. the fact that he only has to pay 14% on his taxes when a lot of you are paying much higher, you know, he's already taking that off the board. capital gains at a low rate. we're not getting money that way. we have not heard from the governor any specifics beyond big bird and eliminating funding for planned parenthood in terms of how he pays for that.
now, governor romney was a successful investor. if somebody came to you, governor, with a plan that says, here, i want to spend $7 trillion or $8 trillion, and we're going to pay for it, but we can't tell you until maybe after the election how we're going to do it, you wouldn't have taken such a sketchy deal, and neither should you, the american people because the math doesn't add up. what's at stake here is one of two things. either, candy, this employees up the deaf -- blows you up the deficit. keep in mind, this is for the additional spending, $8 trillion before we get to the deficit we already have, or alternatively, it's paid for not just by closing deductions of wealthy individuals. that pays 4% of reduction in tax rates, but you'll pay for it. you'll lose deductions. you can't buy the sales pitch,
nobody who looked at it that's serious actually believes it adds up. >> moderator: mr. president, let me get the governor in on this. governor, before we get into a vast array of who says what, if it shouldn't add up, if somehow when you get in there there's not enough revenue coming in, if somehow the numbers don't add up, would you be willing to look again at a 20% -- romney: of course they add up. i was someone who ran businesses for 25 years and balanced a bumming. i ran the olympics and balanced the budget. i ran the state of massachusetts as a governor to the extent any governor does and balanced the budget all four years. when we talk about math that doesn't add up, how about $4 trillion of deficits over the last four years? $5 trillion. that's math that doesn't add up. we have a president talking about someone's plan in a way that's completely foreign to
what my real plan is, and then we have his own record which is we have four years when he said running for office he would cut the deficit in half. instead, he doubled it. he's gone from $10 trillion in national debt to $16 trillion in national debt. if the president were re-elected, we go to almost $20 trillion of national debt. this puts us in a road to greece. i know what it takes to balance budgets. i've done it my entire life. for instance, when he says here's the $5 trillion cut. well, no, it's not. i'm offsetting some of the reductions with holding down deductions. >> moderator: governor, i go to -- i need to have you both hang -- i understand the stakes here, and i understand both of you, but i'll get run out of town if i don't allow -- romney: i described to you precisely how i do it with a single number people can put their deductions and credits -- >> moderator: mr. president, we're keeping track, promise
you. mr. president, next question is for you. obama: great, looking forward to it. >> moderator: katherine fenton has a question for you. >> in what new ways do you intend to legislate my -- rectify the inequalities in the workplace, specifically females who earn less than their male counterparts. obama: i was raised by a single mom who put herself through school while looking after two kids, and she worked hard every day and made a lot of sacrifices to ensure we got everything we needed. my grandmother, he started off as a secretary in a bank. she never got a college education even though she was smart as a whip. she worked up to be a vice president of a local bank, but she hit the glass ceiling. she trained people who would end up becoming her bosses in the
course of her career. she didn't complain. that's not what you did in that generation. this is one of the reasons why one of the first -- thee first bill i signed was called lilly ledbetter bill named after an amazing woman who had been doing the same job as a man for years, found out that she was getting paid less, and the supreme court said she couldn't bring suit because she should have found out about it earlier when she had no way to. we fixed that. that's an example of the advocacy we need because women are increasingly the breadwinners in the family. this is not just a women's issue. this is a family issue. this is a middle class issue. that's why we got to fight for it. it also means that we've got to make sure that young people, like yourself, are able to afford a college education.
earlier, governor romney talked about he wants to make pelle grants and -- pell grants and other education accessible for people. the truth of the matter is that's what we've done. we expanded pell grants for millions of people like millions of young women across the country. we did it by taking $60 billion that was going to banks and lenders as middlemen for the student loan program, and we said let's just cut out the middlemen, give the money directly to students, and as a consequence, millions of young people can afford college making sure that young women can compete in that marketplace, but we've got to enforce the laws, which is what we are doing, and we've also got to make sure that in every walk of life, we do not tolerate discrimination. that's one of the hallmarks of my administration. i'm going to continue to push on this issue for the next four years. >> moderator: governor romney, pay equity for women. romney: thank you, and important topic, one in which i learned a
great deal about, particularly serving as governor of my state because i had the chance to pull together a cabinet, and all the applicants seemed to be men. i went to the staff, and i said how come all the people in the jobs are men? they have the qualifications. i said, gosh, can't we find some women that are also qualified? we took a concerted effort to find women who had backgrounds to be qualified to be members of the cabinet. i went to a number of women's groups helping us find folks. they brought us binders full of women. i was proud of the fact after i staffed my cabinet and senior staff at the university of new york in albany did a survey of all 50 states and concluded mine had more women in leadership positions than any other state in america. one of the reasons i got so many good women to be a part of the team was the recruiting effort, but number two, because i recognized if you have women in
the work force, sometimes they need to be more flexible. my chief of staff, for instance, had two kids still in school. she said i can't be here until eight o'clock at night. i need to be able to get home at five o'clock so i can be there for making dinner for the kids and being with them. we said, fine, let's have a flexible schedule so you have hours that work for you. we're going to have to have employers in the new economy, in the economy i'm going to bring to play, that are going to be so anxious to get good workers, they will be anxious to hire women. in the last four years, women have lost 580,000 jobs, the net of what's happened in the last four years. we are still down 580,000 jobs. 3.5 million more women in poverty now than four years ago. what we can do to help young women and women of all ages is to have a strong economy, so strong that employers are looking to find good employees. bring them into the work force and adapting to a flexible work
schedule giving women the opportunities that they would otherwise not be able to afford. this is what i've done. it's what i look forward to doing, and i know what it takes to make an economy work. i know what a working economy looks like. an economy with 7.8% unemployment is not a real strong economy, an economy that has 23 million people looking for work is not a strong economy. an economy with 50% of kids graduating from college that can't find a job or a college level job, that's not what we have to have. i'm going to help women in america get good work getting a stronger economy and by supporting women in the work force. >> moderator: mr. president, get in on this quickly, please. obama: when governor romney's campaign was asked about the ledbetter bill, whether ledbetter supported it or not, he said, i'll get back to you. that's not the advocacy women need in any economy. now, there's other issues that
have a bearing on how women succeed in the workplace. for example, their health care, you know, a major difference in this campaign is thatñr governor romney feels comfortable having politicians in washington decide the health care choices that women are making. i think that's a mistake. in my health care bill, i said insurance companies need to provide contraceptive coverage to everybody who's in short because this is not just a health issue, but an economic issue for women. it makes a difference. this is money out of their pockets. governor romney not only opposed it, but he suggested that, in fact, employers should be able to make the decision as to whether or not a woman gets contraception through the insurance coverage. that's not the kind of advocacy that women need. when governor romney says we
should eliminate funding for planned parenthood, there are millions of women all across the country who rely on plannedded parenthood for not just contraceptive care, but rely on it for mammograms, cervical cancer screenings. that's a pocket book issue for women and families all across the country. it makes a difference in terms of how well and effectively women are are able to work. when we talk about child care and the credits we're providing, that makes a difference in whether they can go earn a living for their family. these are not just women's issues. these are family issues. these are economic issues. one of the things that makes us grow as app economy is when everybody participates and women are getting the same fair deal as men are. i've got two daughters, and i want to make sure that they have the same opportunities that anybody's sons have. that's part of what i'm fighting for as president of the united
states. >> moderator: i want to move us along to susan, and, governor, it's for you. >> governor romney, i am an undecided voter because i'm disappointed with the lack of progress i've seen in the last four years; however, i do attribute much of america's economic and international problem to the failings and missteps of the bush administration. since both you and president bush are republicans, i fear a return to the policies of those years should you win this election. what is the biggest difference between you and george w. bush, and how do you differentiate yourself from george w. bush? romney: great, thank you. i appreciate that question. i just want to make sure i think i was supposed to get the last answer, but i want to point out i don't believe -- obama: i don't think so, candy.
i want to make sure the time keepers are working. >> moderator: they are all working, and the last part, it's for the two of you to talk to one another, and it's -- go ahead and use the two minutes to answer the question on the floor. romney: i note i don't believe bureaucrats in washington should tell someone whether they should use contraception or not. every woman in america should have access to contraceptives, and the president's statement on my policy is wrong. obama: governor, that's not true. romney: back to you question. president bush and i are different people, and these are different times. my plan is different than what we would have done. we can now, by virtue of new technology, get all the energy we need in north america without having to go to the arabs or anyone else. that was not true in his time. that's why my policy starts with a robust policy to get all the
energy in north america and become energy secure. number two, trade. i'll crack down on china. president bush didn't. i'm also going to dramatically expand trade in latin america. it's been growing 12% a year over a long period of time. i want to add more free trade agreements to have more trade. number three, i'm going to get us to a balanced budget. president bush didn't. president obama was right. he said that that was outrageous to have deficits as high as half a trail -- trillion dollars in the bush years. he was right, but now there's deficits twice that size. his forecast for the next four years are more deficits almost that large. that's the next area i'm different than bush. championing small business is the last one. we -- i came through small business. i understand how hard it is to start a small business that's why everything i do is designed to help small businesses grow and add jobs. i want to keep their taxes down
on small business. i want regulators to see their job as encouraging small enterprise, not crushing it. the thing i find most troubling about obamacare, well, it's a long list, but one of the things most troubling is when you talk to small businesses and what they think about it, they tell you it keeps them from hiring more people. my priority is jobs. i know how to make that happen. president bush had a different path for a very different time. my path is designedded in getting small businesses to grow and help people. >> moderator: thanks, governor, mr. president? obama: well, first of all, it's important to tell you that we did come in during tough times losing 8800,000 jobs a -- 800,000 jobs a month when i started, but in digging our way out of policies that were misplaced and focused on the top doing very well and middle class folks not doing very well.
we've seen 31 consecutive months of job growth, 5.2 million new jobs created, and the plans i've talked about will create even more. when governor romney says that he has very different economic plan, the center piece of the economic plan are tax cuts. that's what took us from surplus to deficit. when he talks about getting tough on china, keep in mind that governor romney invested in companies that were pioneers of outsources to china, and is currently investing in countries -- in companies that are building surveillance equipment for china to spy on its own folks. that's -- governor, you're the last perp who will be tough on china. what we've dope when it comes to fraid is not only sign trade deals for new markets, but we set up a task force for trade
that goes after anybody who is taking advantage of american workers arian businesses and not creating a level playing feel. we brought twice as many cases against unfair trading practices than the previous administration, and we won every single one that's been decided. when i said that we had to make sure china was not flooding our domestic market with cheap tires, governor romney said i was being protectionist, that it wouldn't be helpful to the american workers. in fact, we saved a thousand jobs. that is the tough trade actions required. the last point i want to make is this. there are things where governor romney is different than george bush. george bush didn't propose turning medicare into a voucher. george bush embraced immigration comprehensive reform. he didn't call for deportation. george bush never suggested we eliminate funding for planned
parenthood so there are differences between governor romney and george bush, but they are not on economic policy. in some ways, he's gone to a more extreme place with social policies. that's a mistake. that's not how we move the economy forward. >> moderator: moving on to the next question because it's in the same wheel house. you will be able to respond, but the president gets this question. i want to call on michael jones. mr. president, i vote -- >> mr. president, i voted for you in 2008, what have you done or accomplished in 2012? i'm not as optimistic for 2012. things i need for everyday living are very expensive. obama: well, we've gone through a tough four years, no doubt about it, but four years ago, i told the american people, and i told you i would cut taxes for middle class families, and i did. i told you i'd cut taxes for
small businesses, and i have. i said that i'd end the war in iraq, and i did. i said we'd refocus attention on those who attacked us on 9/11, and we've gone after al-qaeda's leadership like never before and bin laden is dead. i said that we would put in place health care reform to ensure health insurance companies can't jerk you around, and if you didn't have inurns, you could get affordable insurance, and i have. i said i would reign in wall street, and we passed the toughest wall street reform since the 1930s. we created 5 million jobs, gone from 800,000 jobs a month from being lost, and we are making progress. we saved an auto industry on the brink of collapse. does that mean you are not struggling? absolutely not. a lot of us are. that's why the plan put forward for manufacturing and educationing and reducing deficit in a sensible way, using
the savings from ending wars to rebuild america and putting people back to work, making sure that we control our own energy, not just the energy of today, but of the future. all of those things make a difference. the point is the commitment the i've made, i've kept. those that i have not been ail to keep, it's not for lack of trying, and we're going to get it done in a second term, but you should pay attention to the campaign because governor romney's made commitments as well. i suspect he'll keep those too. you know, when members of the republican congress say we're going to sign a no tax pledge so that we don't ask for a dime from millionaires and billionaires to reduce the deficit so we can still invest in education and helping kids go to college, he said, me too. when they said we're going to cut planned parenthood funding, he said, me too. when he said we're going to
repeal obamacare, first thing i'll do, is it's the same health care plan he passed in massachusetts and is working well, he said, me too. that is not the kind of leadership that you need, but you should expect that those are promises he's going to keep. >> moderator: mr. president, let me -- obama: the choice of the election is whose promises are more likely to help you in your life, make sure your kids with go to college, ensure you have ad good paying job, making sure that social security is there for you. >> moderator: mr. president, thank you. governor? romney: i think you know better. i think you know these last four years have not been good as the president described, and that you don't feel like your confident the next four years will be better either. i can tell you that if you elect president obama, you know what you'll get. you're going to get a repeat of the last four years. we can't afford four more years like the last four years. he said by now, unemployment would be at 5.4%.
the difference between where it is and 5.4% is 9 million americans without work. i was not the one who said 5.4 #%. this was the president's plan. didn't get there. he said he would have, by now, put forward a plan to reform medicare and social security because he pointed out they are on the road to bankruptcy. he would reform them. he would get that done. he has not made a proposal on either one. he said in the first year there would be an immigration plan to deal with the immigration challenges. didn't even file it. this is a president who has not been ail to do what he said he'd do. he said he'd cut in half the deficit. he's not done that either. in fact, he doubled it. he said that by now middle income families would have a reduction in their health insurance premiums by $2500 a year. it's gone up by $2500. if obamacare is passed or implemented -- it's already been passed, if it's implemented
fully, that's another $2500 on top. the middle class is getting curbed under the policies of a president who does not understand what it takes to get the economy working again. he says, look, i created 5 million jobs, but that's after losing 5 million jobs. the entire record is such that the unemployment has not been reduced in this country. the unemployment, the number of people looking for work is still 23 million americans. there are more people in poverty, one of the six people in poverty, how about food stamps? when he took office, 32 million people were on food stamps. today, 47 million people are on food stamps. how about the growth of the economy? it's growing more slowly this year than last year and more slowly last year than the year before. the president wants to do well. i understand. the policies he's put in place from obamacare to dodd-frank to his tax policies to his regulatory policies, these policies combined have not let
this economy take off and grow like a could have. you might say, do you have an example of one that works better? yeah. in the reagan recession where unemployment was 10.8%, between that period, the end of that recession and equivalent period of time to today, reagan's recovery created twice as many jobs as this president's recovery. 5 million jobs doesn't keep up with the population growth. the only run unemployment is employeer today because of all the people that dropped out of the work force. the president has tried, but his policies have not worked. he's great as a speaker and describing his plans and vision. that's wonderful except we have a record to look at, and that record shows he just hasn't been able to cut the deficit, to put in place reforms for medicare and social security, to preserve them, to get us the rising incomes we need. median incomes down $4300 a family, and 23 million americans out of work, that's what the
election is about. it's about who can get the middle class in this country a bright and prosperous future and assure our kids the kind of hope and optimism they deserve. >> moderator: governor, i want to move you along. don't go away. we'll have time to respond. we are aware of the clock for both of you, but i want to bring in a different subject here, mr. president, i'll be right back with you. lorrain has a question for governor romney, and we'll be right with you, president obama. >> romney, what do you plan on doing with imgrants without their green cards that are currently living here as productive members of society? romney: thank you for your question. let me step back and tell you what i'd like to do with our immigration policy broadly and
include an answer to your question. first of all, this is a nation of immigrants. we welcome people coming to the country. my dad born in mexico, and ann's mother in wales. i want the country to be better. i want it to be streamlined and clearer. you showcht have to hire -- shouldn't have to hire a lawyer to get into this country legally. we shouldn't give green cards to people who graduate with skills we need. people around the world with credited degrees in science and math get a green card stapled to their diploma to come to the us of a. make sure the system works. we have to stop illegal immigration. there's 4 million people waiting in line to get here legally. those illegally take their place. i will not grant amnesty to those here ill leally, but have an employment verification system and employers that hire people who have come here
illegally are captioned for doing so. i won't put in place mag -- magnets for people coming here illegally. i would not give driver's license for those here illegal as the president would. the kids of those here illegally, they should have a path way to become a permanent resident of the united states, and military service is one way to have a pathway to become a permanent resident. when the president ran for office, he said he'd put in place, in the first year, a piece of legislation, file a bill in the first year, that would reform our immigration system, protect legal immigration, stop illegal immigration. he didn't do it. he had a democrat house and democrat senate, super majority in both houses. why did he fail -- even promote legislation, that would have provided an answer for those that wanted to come here illegally and for those here illegally today? that's a question i think the president will have a chance to answer right now. obama: good, i look forward to
it. lorrain, we are a nation of immigrants. we're just a few miles away from ellis island. we all understand what this country has become because talent from all around the world wants to come here. people are willing to take risks. people who want to build on their dreams and have even bigger dreams than they have. we are a nation of laws. what i said is we have to fix a broken immigration system, and i've done everything that i can on my own and i sought cooperation from congress to fix the system. first thing we did was to streamline the illegal immigration, reduce the box log making it here, and contribute to the country which is good for our economic growth.
they'll start new businesses. they'll make things happen that create jobs here in the united states. number two, we do have to deal with the border to put border patrol on the history, and the flow of undocumented workers across the border is lower than it's been in 40 years. what i also said is if we're going to go after folks here illegally, we have to do it smartly and go after folks that are criminals, gang bangers, those hurting the community, not after students, not after folks who are here just because they are trying to figure out how to feed their families, and that's what we've done. what i've said is for young people who come here, brought here oftentimes by their parents, have gone to school here, pledged allegiance to the flag, think of this as their country and understand themselves as americans in every way except having papers. we should make sure we give them a pathway to citizenship.
that's what i've done administratively. governor romney just said that, you know, heñhr wants to help te young people too, but in the republican primary, he said i will veto the dream act that would allow these young people to have access. his main strategy, during the republican primary, was to say we're going to encourage self-deportation making life so miserable op folks that -- on folks that they'll leave. he called the arizona law ad model for the nation saying law enforcement could stop folks because they suspected they could be up documented workers and check their papers. you know what? if my daughter or yours looks to somebody like they're not a citizen, i don't want to empower somebody like that. we can fix this system in a
comprehensive way, and when governor romney says the challenge is, well, obama didn't try, that's not true. i sat down with democrats and republicans at the beginning of my term, and i said, let's fix this system, including senators previously who supported him on the republican side, but it's very hard for republicans in congress to support comprehensive immigration reform if their standard bearer said this is not something i'm interesting in supporting. >> moderator: let me get the governor in here, mr. president. let's speak to, if you could governor, the idea of self-deportation. romney: let me speak to the points the president made and get them correct. i did not say the arizona law was ad model for the nation in that aspect. i said the e-verify portion of the arizona law, which is a portion of the law saying that employers could be able to determine whether someone is here legally or not, that that was a model for the nation. that's number one. number two, i asked the
president a question. i think hispanics and immigrants all over the nation asked. the other day. when would you said you would file legislation in the first year, he didn't answer. he doesn't answer that question. he says the standard bearer was not four it. i'm glad you thought it was the standard bearer four years ago, but it was not. you said in the first year, you'd file legislation. in the first year, i was licking my wounds from being beat p by john mccain. i was not the standard bearer. my view is that the president should have honored the promise to do as he said. now, one other thing, and that is self-deportation says let people make their own choice. we're not going to round out 12 million people undocumented illegally and take them out of the nation. instead, people can make their own choice. if they find they can't get benefits here they want, and they can't find the job they want, they'll make a decision to go to a place with better
opportunities, but i'm not in favor of rounding up people and taking them out of this country. i am in favor as the president said, and i agree with him, if people committed crimes, they have to get out of the country. a comment made by the president a moment ago, and i didn't get to chance when he described chinese investments -- obama: candy, hold on a second -- >> moderator: i'm sorry -- romney: mr. president, let me finish. >> moderator: governor romney, make it short. all the people have been waiting. romney: investments i have over the last eight years are managed by a blind trust, and i understand they include investments outside the united states including in chinese companies. mr. president, have you looked at your pension? have you looked at your pension? have you? obama: i don't look at your pension, it's not as big as yours so it doesn't take as long.
i don't check it that often. romney: you have investments outside the united states, in china, to a trust -- >> moderator: way off topic. obama: i thought we were talking about immigration. [talking over each other] obama: i want to make sure we understand something. governor romney was not referring to arizona as the model of the nation? his top adviser on immigration is the guy who designed the arizona law, the entirety of it, not e-verify, but the whole thing. that's his policy and it's a bad policy and it won't help us grow. look, when we think about immigration, we have to understand there are folks all around the world who still see america as the land of promise, and they provide us with energy and inin vaition and start companies like intel and google. we want to encourage that.
now, we have to make sure that we do it in a smart, comprehensive way, and we make the legal system better, but when we make this into a divisive political issue, and when we don't have bipartisan support, i can deliver, governor, a bunch of democrats to get comprehensive immigration reform. romney: i'll get it done first year. obama: we have not seen a republican serious about the issue at all. >> moderator: mr. president -- obama: time to be serious about it. >> moderator: don't go away -- obama: i'm here. >> moderator: i want you to talk to carey who wants to switch the topic. obama: okay. >> good evening, mr. president. obama: what's your name? >> carey. we were talking about libya, and we were reading and became aware of reports that the state
department refused extra security for embassy in benghazi, libya prior to the attacks that killed four americans. who was it that denieded enhanced security and why? obama: well, let me first of all talk about our diplomats because they serve all around the world, and they do an incredible job in a very dirnlings situation. these are not just representatives of the united states. they are my representatives. i send them there, often times in harm's way. i know these folks, and i know their families. nobody's more concerned about their safety and security than i am. as soon as it was overrun, i was on the phone with the national security team and gave them three instructions. number one, beef up our security and periodtures, not just in libya, but everywhere in the
region. number two, investigate what happened regardless of where the facts lead us to make sure that folks are held accountable and it doesn't happen again. number three, we are going to find out who did this, and we are going to hunt them down. one of the things i've said throughout my presidency is when folks mess with americans, we go after them. now, governor romney had a very different response. while we were dealing with our diplomats being threatened, governor romney put out a press release trying to make political points, and that is not how a commander in chief operates. you don't turn national security into a political issue, certainly not right when it's happening, and people, not everybody agrees with some of the decisions i've made, but when it comes to national security, i mean what i say. i said i'd end the war in libya and iraq, and i did.
i said they'd we'd go after al-qaeda and bin laden, and we have. i said we'd transition out of afghanistan and start making sure that afghans are responsible for their own security, that's what i'm doing. when it comes to this issue, when i said we're going to find out exactly what happened, everybody will be held accountable, and i am ultimately responsible for what's taking place there because these are my folks, and i'm the one who has to greet coffins when they come home, you know that i mean what i say. >> moderator: mr. president, moving us along. governor? romney: thank you for the question. it's an important one, and i think the president just said correctly that the buck stops at his desk and he takes responsibility for that failure in providing security resources and terrible things may well happen from time to time. i feel very deeply sympathetic
for the families who lost loved ones. there's a memorial service today for the one lost in the tragedy. we think of their families and care for them deeply. there were other issues associated with this tragedy. there were many days that passed before we knew whether this was a spontaneous demonstration or whether it was a terrorist attack, and there was no demonstration involved. it was a terrorist attack. it took a long time for that to be told to the american people. whether there was some misleading or instead whether we didn't know what happened, ask yourself why didn't we know five days later when the ambassador to the united nations went on tv to say it was a demonstration. how would we have not known? i find more troubling than this on the day following the assassination of the united states ambassador, first time that's happened since 1979, when we have four americans killed there, when apparently we didn't know what happened, but the president, the day after that happened, flies to las vegas for
a political fundraiser, and then the next day to colorado for another political event. i think these actions taken by a president and leader have symbolic significance, and perhaps even material significance in that you hope that during that time we could call in the people eye witnesses. we read their accounts now about what happened. it was clear this was not a demonstration. this was an attack by terrorists calling into question the president's policy in the middle east. look what's happening in syria, egypt, and now in libya. consider the distance between ourselves and israel. the president said that he was going to put daylight between us and israel. we have iran four years closer to a nuclear bomb. sere yew's not just -- syria's not just the tragedy of 30,000 civilians killed by a military, but a strategically significant player for america. the president's policies throughout the middle east began with an apology tour and pursue
a strategy of leading from behind, and this strategy is unraveling before our very eyes. >> moderator: because we're closing in, i want to get a lot of people in. i want to ask you something, mr. president, and have the governor romney answer quickly. hillary clinton took full responsibility, and does the buck stop with the secretary of state as far as what went on here? obama: secretary clinton did a great job, but she works for me. i'm the president. i'm always responsible. that's why no one's more interested in finding out exactly what happened than i did. the day after the aattack, governor, i stood in the rose garden telling the american people and the world we will find out what happened, that this was an act of terror, and i also said that we're going to hunt down those who committed
the crime, and then a few days later, i was there greeting the caskets coming into andrews air force base grieving with the families. the suggestion that anyone in my team or the secretary of state, our u.n. ambassador, anybody on my team would play politics or mislead when we've lost four of our own, governor, is offensive. that's not what we do. that's not what i do as president. that's not what i do as commander in chief. >> moderator: governor, if you want to reply quickly. romney: i do. it's interesting the president said something which was on the day after the attack he went to the rose garden and said thisñhr was an act of terror. you said in the rose garden the day after the attack it was an act of terror. it was not a spontaneous
demonstration, is that what you are saying? obama: please proceed, governor. romney: i want that for the record because it took the president 14 days before he called the attack in benghazi. >> moderator: he did, in fact, sure -- obama: can you say thatñi loude, candy? >> moderator: he did call it an act of terror and did as well take two weeks or so for the whole idea of their being a riot out there about this tape to come out. you're correct about that. romney: the administration -- [applause] romny: the administration indicated it was a spoon tape yows reaction and a long time to say it was a terrorist agent -- act by a terrorist group. on sunday, the -- your secretary, the ambassador of the united nations went on the sunday television shows and spoke about how it was a spoon
tape yows act. obama: happy to have a longer conversation -- >> moderator: i'm want to move on. obama: i'm happy too. i just want to make sure that, you know, all these wonderful folks have a chance to ask -- >> moderator: what i want to do, mr. president, stand there for a second because i want to introduce you to nina gonzalez who has a question we hear a lot over the internet and from the crowd. >> president obama, during the democratic national convention in 2008, you stated you wanted to keep ak47s out of the hands of criminals. what has your administration done or plan to do to limit the availability of assault weapons? obama: we're a nation that believes in the second amendment, and i believe in the second amendment. you know, we have a long tray -- tradition of hunting and sportsman and people who want to make sure they can protect
themselves, but there have been too many incidents in the course of my presidency where i had to comfort families who lost somebody, most recently, out in awe -- aurora. just a couple weeks ago, actually, probably a month, i saw a mother who i met at the bedside of her son who was shot in that theater. her son was shot through the head. we spent some time and said a prayer, and remarkably baht two months later, this young man and mom showed up, and he looked unbelieveunbelievable. good as new. there were a lot of families who didn't have that good fortune whose sons or daughters or husbands didn't survive. my belief is that, a, we have to enforce the laws we already got, make sure that we're keeping
guns out of the hands of criminals, those who are mentally ill. we've done a much better job in terms of background checks, but we have more to do with enforcement, but i also share your belief that weapons that were designed for soldiers in war theaters don't belong on the streets. what what i'm trying to do is to get a broader conversation about how do we reduce the violence generally? part of it is seeing if we can get an assault weapons ban reintroduced, but part of it is also looking at other sources of the violence because, frankly, in my home town of chicago, there's a lot of violation, and they are not using ak-47s, but cheap handguns. what can we do to intervene to ensure young people have opportunity? that our schools are working? that if there's violence on the streets that working with faith groups and law enforcement, we can catch it before it's out of
control. what i want is a comprehensive strategy, part of it is seeing if we can get automatic weapons that kill folks in amazing numbers out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill, but part of it is going deeper and seeing if we can get into the communities making sure we catch violence impulses before they occur. >> moderator: governor romney, the question is about assault weapons, ak-47s. romney: i'm not in favor of new legislation on guns and taking guns away or making certain guns illegal. we don't want automatic weapons, and that's already illegal in the country to have automatic weapons. what we have to do is what the president mentioned in the ends of the remarks there which is to make e enormous efforts to enfoe the gun laws we have and to change the culture of violence we have. you ask how are we going to do that? there are a number of things. he mentioned good schools. i totally agree.
we were able to drive schools to number one in the nation in our state, and if we do a better job in education, we give people the hope and opportunity they deserve and less violence from that. another thing, and that is parents. we need moms and dads helping to raise kids wherever possible, the benefit of having two parents in the home, and that's not always possible. a lot of great single moms and dads, but, gosh, to tell our kids that before they have babies, think about getting married to someone, that's a great idea because if there's a two parent family, the prospect of living in poverty goes down dramatically. the opportunities that the child will be able to achieve increase dramatically. we can make changes in the way our culture works to bring people away from violence and give them opportunity and bring them in the american system. the greatest failure we had with regards to gun violence in some respects is what it's nope as fast and furious. it was a program under this administration, and how it worked exactly, we don't know
precisely, but where thousands of automatic and ak-47 type weapons were given to people who ultimately gave them to drug lords that used those weapons against their own citizens and killed americans with them. this was a program of the government. for what purpose it was put in place, i can't imagine. it's one of the great tramming jobs in iowas related to violence in our society which occurred during this administration which i think the american people want to understand fully. it's. invest gaited to a degree -- it's been investigated to a degree, but the administration has carried out executive privilege to prevent all information from coming out. i'd like to understand who it was that did this, what the idea was behind it, why it led to the violence. thousands of guns going to mexico, drug lords. >> moderator: governor, if i could, the question was about assault weapons banned and are no longer banned. i know that you signed an assault weapons ban in massachusetts.
obviously, with this question, you no longer do support that. why is that given the kind of violence we see, sometimes with the mass killings, why is it that you changed your mind? romney: candy, in my state, the pro-gun folks and anti-gun folks came together to put together a piece of legislation referred to as an assault weapon ban, but it had the progun and antigun people together providing opportunities that both wanted. there were hunting opportunities, fringe, not previously available. it was a mutually agreed upon legislation. that's what we need more of, candy. what we have right now in washington is a place that's gridlocked. >> moderator: if you can get people to agree to it, you'd be for it? romney: we don't have the leadership in washington to work. i was able to do that in my state to bring the two together. obama: candy? >> moderator: mr. president.
obama: myth mitt was for the assault weapons ban before he was against it. he said the reason he changed his mind was in part because he was seeking the endorsement of the national rifle association so that's on the record. one area we agree on is the importance of parents and schools because i do believe that if our young people have opportunity, they are less likely to agree in the violent acts. we will not eliminate everybody who is mentally disturbed, and we have to make sure they dent get weapons, but we can make decisions in terms of ensuring every young person in america, regardless of what they look like have a chance to succeed. we have not talked about education much, but i think it is very important to understand that the reforms we put in place working with 46 governors around the country are seeing schools that are some of the ones that are the toughest for kids
starting to succeed. we're seeing gains in math and science. when it comes to community colleges, we are setting up programs including with nassau community college to retrain workers like young people who dropped out, but thousand are getting another chance. training them for the job that exists right now. in fact, employers are looking for skilled workers. we're matching them up. giving them access to higher education. as i said, we have made sure that millions of young people are able to get education they were not able to get before. >> moderator: mr. president, i have to move you along. we need to do it here. obama: one second because this is important. this is part of the choice in this election. when governor romney was asked whether teachers, hiring more teachers was important in growing the economy, governor romney says that doesn't grow the economy. >> moderator: the question --
mr. president, the question was on guns. i need to move us along. obama: i understand. >> moderator: the question was guns. obama: i understand. that maybes a difference whether we move the economy forward for the young people and reduce vieps. >> moderator: i understand. i want carol goldberg to stand up because she has a question for governor romney. >> the outsourcing of american jobs overseas has taken a toll on our economy, what plans do you have to put back and keep jobs here in the united states? romney: great, important question because you're absolutely right. the place where we've seen manufacturing go has been china. china's now the largest manufacturer in the world. it used to be the united states of america. a lot of good people lost jobs. a half million manufacturing jobs lost in the last four years. that's total over the last four years. one of the reasons for that is that people think it's more attractive in some cases to go offshore than to stay here. we have made it less attractive
for enterprises to stay here than to go offshore from time to time. what i will do as president a make sure it's more attractive to come to america again. this is the way we're going to create jobs in this country. it's not by trickle down government saying we're going to take more money from people and hire more government workers, raise more taxes, put in place more regulation, trickle down government has never worked here or anywhere. i want to make america the most attractive place in the world for entrepreneurs, but small business, for big business to grow and invest in america. we have to ensure as we trade with other nations they play by other rules. china has not. one of the ways they don't play by the rules is artificially holding down their currency making prices and goods low making them advantageous in the marketplace, and manufacturers here in the u.s. can't compete.
china has been a currency ma lip later for years and years and years, and the president has a regular opportunity to label them as a currency manipulator but refuses to do so. on day one, i'll label china a currency manipulator allowing me as president to put in place, if necessary, tariffs where i believe that they are taking unfair advantage of our manufacturers. we're going to make sure that people we trade with around the world play by the rules. let me not just stop there. don't forget what's key to bringing back jobs here is not just finding someone else to punish, and i'm going to be strict with people who we trade with to make sure they follow the law and play by the rules, but it's also to make america the most attractive place in the world for businesses of all kinds. that's why i want to bring on the tax rates on small employers, big employers so they want to be here. canada's tax rate on companies is now 15%.
ours is 35%. if you start are business, where would you rather start it? we have to be competitive if we're going to create more jobs here. regulations have quadrupled. the rate of regulations quadrupled under this president. companies say they feel like they are under attack from our own government. i want regulators to see the job as encouraging small business, not crushing it. there's no question that obamacare has been an extraordinary deterrent to enterprises hiring people. my priority is ensuring we get more people hired. if we have more people hired, if we get back manufacturing jobs, if we get back all kinds of jobs into this country, then you're going to see rising incomes again. the reason incomes are down because unemployment is high. i know what it takes to get this to happen, and my plan does that, and one part is to make sure we keep china playing by the rules. >> moderator: mr. president,
two minutes here because we are then going to go to the last question. obama: okay. we need to create jobs here. both governor romney and i agree actually that we have to lower the corporate tax rate. tas too high. there's a difference in terms of how we would do it. i want to close loopholes that allow companies to detect expenses when they move to china, that allow them to profit offshore and not have to get taxed so they have tax advantaged offshore. all of those changes in our tax code would make a difference. now, governor romney wants to expand those tax breaks. one of his big ideas when it comes to corporate tax reform would be to say if you invest overseas, you make profits overseas, you don't have to pay u.s. taxes. if you're a small business or mom and pop business or a big business starting here, you have to pay the reduced rate governor
romney's talking about. that's estimated that creates 800,000 new jobs. the problem is they will be in china or india or germany. that's not the way we're going to create jobs here. the way we create jobs here is not just to change our tax code, but also to double our exports. we are on pace to double exports. one of the commitments i made as president creating tens of thousands of jobs all across the country. that's why we kept on pushing trade deals, but trade deals that make sure american workers and businesses are getting a good deal. governor romney talked about china as i already indicated. the private sector, governor romney's company invested in what were called pioneers of outsources. that's not my phrase. that's what reporters called it. as far as currency manipulation, the currency's gone up 11% since i was president because we pushed them hard.
we put unprecedented trade pressure on china. that's why exports have significantly increased under my presidency. that's going to help to create jobs here. >> moderator: mr. president, we have a short time for a quick discussion here. ipad, the macs, iphones, all manufactured in china, one of the major reasons is labor is cheaper. how do you convince a great american company to bring that manufacturing back here? romney: the answer is straightforward. we can compete with nip in the world as long as the playing field is level. china's been cheating over the years. one by holding down the value of the currency. number two, by stealing our intellectual property, our designs, patents, technology, and there's an apple store now in china that's a counterfeit apple store selling counterfit goods. they hack into our computers. we will have to have people play on a fair basis. that's number one. number two, make america the
most attractive place for entrepreneurs, people who want to expand business. that's what brings jobs in. president's characterization is completely false. let me tell you -- >> moderator: going to the president here because we are returning out of time. the question is can we ever -- we can't get wages like that to be sustained. obama: there's some jobs that will not come back because they are low wage, low skill jobs. i want high way, high skill jobs. we have to emphasize manufacturing, invest in advanced manufacturing. that's why we've got to make sure we have the best science and research in the world, and when we talk about deficits, if we're adding to the deficit for tax cuts for folks who don't need them, and we cut investments in research and science that create the next apple, create the next new innovation that will sell products around the world, we lose that race. if we're not training engineers to ensure they are equipped here
in this country, than companies won't come here. those investments will help to make sure we continue to lead this world economy, not just next year, but ten years from now, 50 years from now, and 100 years from now. romney: government does not create jobs. >> moderator: governor romney, i want to enter deuce you to barry -- introduce you to barry green because he has the last question. >> hi, governor. i think this is a tough question. each of you, what do you believe is the biggest misperception that the american people have about you as a man and a candidate using specific examples, take the opportunity to debunc that misperception and set us straight? romney: thank you. that's an opportunity for me, and i appreciate it. in the nature of a campaign, it seems that some campaigns are focused on attacking a person
rather than prescribing their own future and the things they'd like to do. in the course of that, i think the president's campaign characterized me as someone who's different than who i am. acare about 100% of the american people. i want 100% of the american people to have a bright and prosperous future. i care about our kids. i understand what it takes to make a bright and prosperous future for america again. i spent my life in the private sector, not government. i'm a guy who wants to help with the experience i have with the american people. my passion flows from the fact that i believe in god, and i believe we're all children of the same god. i believe we have a responsibility to care for one another. i served as a missionary for my church. i served as a pastor in my congregation for ten years, sat across the table from people out of work and worked with them to try to find new work or help them through tough times. i went to olympics when they were in trouble to get them on track. as governor of my state, i was
able to get 100% of the people ensuredded, all -- insured, all of my kids, 98% of the adults, able to get the schools ranked number one in the nation so all the kids had a bright opportunity for a future. i understand that i can get this country on track again. we don't have to settle for what we are going through, we don't have to settle for gasoline at four bucks or settle for unemployment at a chronically high level. we don't have to settle for 47 million people on food stamps. we don't have to settle for 50% of kids coming out of college unable to get work. we don't so to settle for 23 million people struggling to get a good job. if i'm president, i'll get america working again, a balanced budget. the president has not. i will. i'll make sure we reform medicare and social security to preserve them for coming generations. the president said he would. he didn't. >> moderator: governor -- romney: ill get incomes up. by the way, i did these things.
i served as governor and showed i could get them done. >> moderator: mr. president, the last two minutes belong to you. obama: barry, i think a lot of this campaign, maybe over the last four years was devoted to the notion that i think government creates jobs, that that somehow is the answer -- that's not what i believe. i believe the free enterprise system is the greatest engine to prosperity the world's ever known. i believe in self-reliance, and individual initiative, and risk takers being rewarded, but i also believe everyone should have a fair shot and everybody should do their fair share and everybody should play by the same rules because that's how the economy's grown. that's how we built the world's greatest middle class. you know, and that is part of what is at stake in the election. there's a fundment tally different vision -- fontmently different vision on how to move the country forward.
i believe governor romney is a good man. he loves his family, cares about his faith, but i also believe that when he said behind closed doors that 47% of the country considered themselves victims who refuse personal responsibility, think about who he was talking about. folks on social security who worked all their lives, veterans who sacrificed for this country, students who are out there trying to hopefully advance their own dreams, but also this country's dreams. soldiers who are overseas fighting for us right now. people who are working hard every day paying payroll tax, gas taxes, but don't make enough income. i want to fight for them. that's what i've been doing the last four years because if they succeed, i believe the country succeeds. when my grandfather fought in world war ii and came back and he got a gi bill allowing him to
go to college, that was not a handout. that was something that advanced the entire country. i want to make sure that the next generation has those same opportunities. that's why i'm asking for your vote, and that's why i'm asking for another four years. >> moderator: president obama, governor romney, thank you for being here tonight. on that note, we have come to an end of this town hall debate. thanks to the participants for their time and to the people of hofstra university for their hospitality. the next and final debate takes place monday night at lynn university at boca raton, florida. don't forget to watch. election day is three weeks from today. don't forget to vote. good night. [applause] [inaudible conversations]
.. at "politico." >> you're in for a great treat because we haven't even discussed the debate. at about the two of these guys think. i'm joined with john harris and mike allen. i will kick it off by saying two things are for certain. one, these two men did not like each other. because even their the body language and hear their
responses. and two, barack obama was a radically different performer today than he was in the first debate. he was crisper, stronger, he was significantly more precise than he might even have one but i like to call police at. i've never heard more stats thrown out in 90 minutes. these guys clearly came or hurston were clearly told to be as specific as humanly possible. >> one thing the president did is reassure his supporters. andrew sullivan, one of the earliest and hardest bedwetters as the obama campaign would say to read it right away, i recognize this guy. nick kristof from "the new york times" said he was that feisty guy in the obama mask? i will say that twitter has declared a clear winner of this debate. jeremy, the first questioner is going to get that job in two
years. >> if president obama loses this election, it won't be because of debate. i think we would've said before that that was decisive at first. it's still possible he could lose this election, but it won't be the debate. the strong performance to effectively put us into balance. two things come and they are both intentionally competitive men. this was probably driving the sense that they just plain don't like each other. a natural competitive spoken that the methane as they appeared a mac would have another debacle like last time. i sense that this time that romney's competitiveness they didn't see a little peevish. there is kind of a drill from a show that quality. >> constantly hassling the moderator. >> some that he bullied her. i did feel that he was lightly annoying frankly.
>> there's always been an awkwardness in debates when you try to interject. am curious to get the take on some of the debate press because you said beforehand they spend so much time thinking about style. i was surprised that romney didn't try to carry the momentum is seeming presidential come to presidential come to, seeming moderates come assuming cooperatives. instead, he seemed to get irked early on and sort of wanted to go on the attack and talk about the failures of obama. i'm not appropriately balance it with the optimism we saw vast around conversing to appeal particularly with women who had a problem with. >> right come he didn't treated too much as an actual debate. but among this point, when this isn't really a debate. what it is is not addition. it's not the question of who can be the most aggressive or score the most points. who can seem the most commanding. and that does some positive optimism, some humor, almost an utterly humorous evening really from both candidates i thought.
>> a couple good moments. a good heads-up about the very beginning when governor romney said to jeremy, when do you graduate? interjected there. it is very effective moment when he talked about the women on his gubernatorial staff and how his chief of staff had gone home in a afternoon stricter family. that is the true story. she actually did go home at 3:30 and nobody ever asked where she was. >> what about the comments like a binder full of women? >> that's been mocked on facebook and twitter from what i understand. >> door number painfully awkward moments for governor romney. american bridge, one of the liberal group says already thought the website, binder full of women.com. there's also a binder full of women twitter feed. so governor romney won't live that one down in a hurry. >> and getting an e-mail from
lois romano who sat is very defensive about the performance. at last become of the top strategists is red-faced and defendant on this performance. i sense they probably feel that the coverage is going to slip out of their control. >> that's what happened last time. obama wasn't that bad. it didn't seem like it the best evening. it starts 45, 55 goes to the echo chamber and its 9010 within 24 hours. i thought he did okay, not great. twenty-first of now will is one-on-one. obama won one, romney won one. >> and under one of those vandehei theories, obama got the best event. the overwhelming complaints about the moderator and audience are all coming from republicans and there are tons of them. that's not usually sign of confidence. >> and other good debate performance city take a
potential weakness internet to a strength. it's also very telling moment when they were debating the bf, where the president is clearly vulnerable. the story they've told has changed since the beginning they sent out mixed messages about what happened and when they knew precisely what happened. yet he is not only to talk but i'm the commander-in-chief. no, the buck stops here. it's not hillary clinton who will take responsibility. i take responsibility not the one who greets those caskets. and he looked very presidential at that moment, whereas mitt romney missed an opportunity to be able to really get at whether or not the white house has been forthcoming. >> the one piece of hard news out of this debate is that it's clear that the white house come at the obama campaign is trying to de-legitimate ties criticism of libya. you're the present one of those moments say that he found from these criticisms offensives. the e-mail from the obama campaign says that in his command of the facts about libya, they said governor romney
had a jeweled fold moment, referring to the time in his debate with gerald ford had liberated eastern europe. >> i'm curious, what did we thing about the moment where romney was asked to differentiate himself from george w. bush? i think that's a key moment. i don't feel confident. >> now, but i can tell you how his plane. sitting and watching john's office, we thought he'd take it to bush, but i can tell you the e-mail is people don't like it. evangelicals did not like it. they wanted them to say and we know from pulling he could have said this. but what a lot of republicans wanted him to say was whatever your issues with george w. bush, he was better than barack obama and he didn't say that. >> when every of the same number of points in her plan as you do for your critique for george w. bush, probably not a great thing for the republicans.
he didn't say president bush is a good man, always kept his word but we have differences. it was a little taken at face value until you all the ways i disagreed with george bush and produce a terrible president. >> were always looking for authenticity and settings and i was pretty authentic. he clearly was speaking from his heart. he might get bad e-mails from republicans. >> the topic has been pushing this point for a long time, that if you look at the polling and obama speeches, he's constantly blaming bush for the recession and jonathan martin has had to be the probably should've been running against george bush more. he certainly did tonight. >> my e-mail from jonathan said he didn't think the answer is effective at all. you and i watched my office thought it was. >> evangelicals don't like it.
>> yeah, president obama turned it into a strength by pointing out areas where he thought what bush was better than you on immigration reform and medicare. i thought those of the ritual bonus performance from beginning to end. you can take issue with some of his answers in that time he even saved a peevish, but he was very agile and taken almost every question and turn it into some sort of effective attack against romney, including the very end because we were commenting about how he didn't get the 47% attack. he got the best of both worlds. he ended without a response from mitt romney. >> there's going to be a bunch of fact checks, a fact check here when governor romney said obama had been slow in calling the libyan attack terrorism and the president said wait a minute, in the rose garden the day after i referred to an act of terror, candy crowley step in
and said he was right. it's actually arguable. i'm looking at the transcript of the day after and he started by referring to them as selfless acts, which casted very differently than the very planned action we now have. later to his candy makes a reference to 9/11 and he says very generally, we will not let acts of terror go unpunished. so that's an arguable point. romney was caught off guard. he thought his press had been a little long. it was smart of the president to do that, but it's not cut and dried. >> he spent time arguing a small point, what did the administration say, not a big point. what are we to make of that episode? >> very good point. >> your point earlier about taking the word debate a little too seriously and actually engaging each never question is
supposed to elevation. it uses a lot more elevation in the first debate. i thought it really served him well. i want to talk too much about style, but even his physical presence in this debate, he didn't have the smile on his face. he didn't seem as loose this time around. that came through because i thought that sort of the sunny side to the romney people had not seen before was crucial in moving the numbers we've seen in both pew and gallup. >> there was a peevish quality to the entire debate, particularly romney, but really to the whole thing. >> your point about them not liking each other. i can e-mail that they thought the secret service would intervene in the first question. i predict that the photo on a lot of front pages will be from the first question were the two are soon pretty close to each other, pointing at each other. there was a moment there are both pointing. >> let's take a look at obama's response to the question from
the guy who said they voted for you in 2008, but why should i vote again? because at the end of the day, his capacity transit that effectively is that the whole election is about. people are sitting there i like the guy, but i don't like last for years. i'm not sure what the next four years look like. >> give me something to hang my hat on. >> let's see how he handled it. >> i voted for you and to designate. what have you done or accomplished when they vote vote in 2012? are not as optimistic as i was in 2012. most things they need for everyday living are very expensive. >> well, we've gone through tough for years. there's no doubt about it. four years ago i told the american people and told to cut taxes for middle-class families and i did. bolshoi cut taxes for small businesses and i have. i set out on the war in iraq in
a bid. i said would refocus attention on those who attract us on 9/11 would've gone after al qaeda's leadership like never before and osama bin laden is dead. >> i can tell felix was in the balmy notion going to get. you get a repeat of the last for years. we can't afford four more like the last four years. he said by now would have unemployment at 514%. the difference between where it isn't five-point or% is 9 million americans without work. i wasn't the one that said 5.4%. this was the president's plan. didn't get there. he said he would have by now put forward a plan to reform medicare and social security because he pointed out there in the road to bankruptcy. he would reform them, get that done. he hasn't even made a proposal on either one. he said in his first year he put immigration plan that would deal with immigration challenges. didn't even silent.
this is a president who has not been able to do what he said he would do. he said he would cut in half the deficit. he hasn't done that either. in fact, he doubleday. he said by now middle-income families would have a reduction in their health insurance premiums by $2500 s-sierra. if, by 2500 year. and if obama karas pastor implemented dashes or even past. if it's implemented will be another 2500 on top. the middle class is getting crushed under the policies of a president who is not understood what it takes to get the economy working again. >> you know, will take away from this debate in the other debate. i don't think an old saying that promised not busy to be president. he's clearly passed that threshold. we'll come down to the choice committees like barack obama lechee down during the last for years and it's so are you willing to give them a crack at another four? or was mitt romney making a
convincing case that i've actually got a plan is going to create the 12 million jobs he keeps promising is going to bring down the deficit. if the measure to that, john, in totality in prosecuting the argument about why he would be a better candidate? >> if that is most effective in prosecuting the failures and seemed genuinely passionate about not just that he was reciting points about reciting the ways he thought obama has failed. when he talked about his own program, probably because it was so similar to the exact points at the first debate in denver, to me it sounded a little sound bite -- and not that sort of genuine conviction that you get when you listen to someone who actually has deep views in a real pan for implementing. >> for those of you keeping score at home car looks at the president got four more minutes of speaking time than mitt romney. the debate rademacher. i'm sure we have some unhappy networks.
we'll go now to the debate seem trigger is with us. she's been working the room, talking officials from both campaign and the spin room where both campaigns come out and tell us how we should think. what are you hearing? we will pull her back in one second. one of the things i want to talk to lois about when she is with us is, what is the reaction from the romney people? if you've been written your e-mail sunset, what are the tone of those e-mails? is a stomach a campaign that feels that we won this debate? or working a little trouble? >> is a lot of complaints about the moderator and the audience, which is not sarcastic. >> you complain about my editing. you know it's about story. >> we don't write the headlines. for what they are saying, also what they are saying is that the
president was trying to push arguments that he had sort of -- they both were sorted memorize and both came at sort of a rope audit. i think we have lois romano now. lois romano straightness from the spin room, the spin zone. he sent a fascinating e-mail earlier saying that the romney folks sounded a little defensive. >> they deyo. well, first of all, let me just say as opposed to last week in the obama people cannot 17 minutes after the debate, they came out two minutes before the debate was over. i mean, they had a real balance in their stead. they're really happy. the romney people, not so much. ed gillespie, who was mobbed by people is very friendly to the process looked slightly agitated. they are pressing him about on the libya exchange and he was very into the back-and-forth of
who said what when. and you know, reporters were asking if people cared about this? he snapped at reporters have let let me finish talking. but the most interesting thing was they asked him about candy crowley sticking up for the president with regards to whether he mentioned the word terror. he said she was wrong. so i'm agreeing with that you are understanding is that they're not happy with candy crowley. i think they thought she didn't control it -- the debate. and there's some muttering about the questions. you know, she screamed a lot of the questions. some of those early questions seems that they were very tailored to what mr. obama would want to talk about. and although very different fields of thought in the spin room in denver last week, when they bomb the people were kind of scrambling to defend his
lackluster, you know, demeanor and his performance. nothing like that tonight. they kept referring to mr. obama's sketchy deals and they're clearly still on the seas line, making up stuff. john kerry came out before the debate, you know, characterized it as a big scam he's presenting to the american people. they clearly went in with a plan and feel extremely good at the way the president executed it. >> thank you triple check in before the show once. you've been looking out the specifics of what they said, what was true, what wasn't true. what were some of the areas where you feel the candidates for most misleading? >> one of the biggest associate just brought up, which was libya. certainly winning point for obama. when you're looking backstage on the computer about what he said in the